vol. 43, no. 4
Primary tabs
Volume XLIII
May 1978
to Santa Cruz voters
Only hours before the Santa Cruz
County June sample ballot was
delivered to the printer the ACLU
persuaded the California Supreme
Court to grant an emergency stay of a
' Superior Court order that two police
conduct issues be stricken from that
ballot.
Community Against Organized
Militarism (CALM), a Santa Cruz
based organization, sponsored the two
initiatives which qualified for the June
County ballot. One initiative
(Proposition A) characterized as the
"anti-SWAT" measure, asks voters to
approve of a ban on the use of machine
guns and paramilitary operations by
police in Santa Cruz County, except as
required by State and Federal laws.
The second initiative (Proposition B),
calls for a Law Enforcement Review
Commission which would provide for
community participation in setting law
enforcement policies and investigating
complaints of police abuse. -
Superior Court Judge Bruce Allen
threw both measures off the ballot on
Monday, April 3 based on the sub-
stance of the measures, which he
The two-thirds vote required for
approval of any new local taxes under
the Jarvis-Gann initiative, Proposition
13, should be declared un-
constitutional, according to a policy
adopted by the ACLU's Board of
Directors last month.
"The ACLU has argued since 1970
that two-thirds vote requirements for
the imposition of taxes are un-
constitutional because they violate the
general principle of one person-one vote
which the United States Supreme Court
has often imposed in interpreting the
equal protection clause of the Four-
teenth Amendment,'' executive
Director David M. Fishlow said in
publicly announcing the Union's op-
position to Proposition 13.
"A requirement that two-thirds of
the voters approve a tax measure gives
those who vote `no' twice as much
power as those who vote `yes,' '' Fishlow
said. :
"The California Supreme Court said
"GE.
Published by Marin Sun Printing - i i
120 Mitchell Boulevard, S.R. Ae!
claimed were "completely and totally
invalid."
ACLU attorney Amitai Schwartz, -
who filed the emergency appeal for a
stay, successfully maintained that Judge
Allen's pre-ballot order disrespected
judicial guidelines for removing items
from the ballot, because those. items
"must be
doubt."
The two police conduct measures
were challenged in the Superior Court
by Santa Cruz County law enforcement
officials after proponents had secured
the necessary 9,000 signatures required
for a local initiative to be included on
the ballot during a six-week campaign.
Phil Alba, local director of CALM
claims that the ballot measure was their
final route after three years of work by
the local groups to stop police abuse
and to end the `militarization' of local
law enforcement agencies. `CALM has
worked diligently for police ac-
-countability and has tried to bring
legislative reform about through the
Board of - Supervisors, the State
Assembly, and has attempted to
: continued on page 6
~ ACLU opposes Jarvis /Gann
in 1970, in a case called Westbrook v.
Mihaley, .that such laws are un-
constitutional unless the provision can
be shown to be absolutely necessary."
In the 1970 case, the Supreme Court
said "while economic conditions in the
late Nineteenth Century may have
justified such a provision, today it is no
- longer necessary to impair the right to
vote in order to guarantee responsible
municipal financial policies."'
Associate Justice Raymond L.
Sullivan, who wrote the decision, was
pointing out the difference between
wildspending and unstable municipal
governments who operated in the 1880's
without the restraints of state law
subsequently imposed to protect cities
and other local government units from
incurring more indebtedness than they
can handle.
"Though the U.S. Supreme Court
over-ruled the 1970 California decision,
other legal problems with the two-thirds
`continued on page 7
invalid beyond a clear
eins be
womens rights
Zebra Girl Tucker may finally be
allowed to `go the distance' - to fight
the usual ten round boxing match, an
opportunity which the State Athletic
Commission had denied her, and other
professional women boxers in
California until recent ACLU legal
action knocked out the discriminatory
ban.
Shirley Tucker, known professionally
as ``Zebra Girl," brought her charge of
sex discrimination to the ACLU,
claiming that the 1976 law, which
finally allowed women to enter the
professional boxing ring, by restricting
WAT " law does
No. 4 |
Legislative
Conference planned
What role does the ACLU play in
the California legislature?
How do legislators make decisions
regarding the future of civil liberties
at the state capitol?
Who is sensitive to civil liberties
concerns in Sacramento?
Those are questions which ACLU
members may be asking, and the
best place to find the answers will be
at the Second Annual Legislative
Action Conference which this year
will be held on June 26-27 at the
Senator Hotel in Sacramento.
At that time the legislature will be
in the midst of its budget
deliberations, therefore such con-
troversial subjects as abortion
funding and property tax relief
should be on the floor.
You should be there too. The
program will include visits to your
continued on page 7
their bouts to four rounds effectively
kept them out of the ring, because four-
round fights are not favored by
promoters.
Zebra Girl claimed that women
should be able to fight as many rounds
as they are capable of fighting, "the
same way as men, and not restrict them
`forever to four rounds just because we
are ladies."'
ACLU staff counsel Margaret Crosby
agreed with Ms. Tucker's charge and
asked the State Athletic Commission,
continued on page 6
S.F. school resegregation charge
The creation of `"`one-race schools" as
part of San Francisco's new school
district `Redesign Plan' will be
challenged by the ACLU of Northern
California as friend of the court in an
NAACP school desegregation lawsuit.
"Redesign," an ambitious plan to
restructure San Francisco's troubled
school district, suffering from declining (c)
enrollment, excluded the largest black
population center - Hunters Point-
Bayview District - from the design
now on the brink of implementation.
The San Francisco School District
has been under court order to
desegregate its schools since 1971, as
the result of a suit brought by the
NAACP. That desegregation order, by
by U.S. District Court Judge Stanley
Weigel, instituted the so-called Horse-
shoe Plan.
`In 1974, the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals vacated Judge Weigel's
Horseshoe Plan decision and directed
that it be reconsidered in light of a 1973
continued on page 2
-Election Issue-
ballot on p.
May 1978
aclu news
LEGAL
Reseegregation
continued from page I
U.S. Supreme Court decision (Keyes v.
School District No. 1) which established
the requirement that a school district
must have intended to segregate the
schools in order to ask for a
desegregation plan.
The court-ordered Horseshoe Plan, -
however, was to remain in effect until
the two parties, the NAACP and the
school district, had an opportunity to
argue the issue of intent. Such
proceedings regarding the _ school
district's intent to segregate never took
place, and the case has essentially
remained dormant during the last four
years, while the schools have slowly
resegregated for a variety of reasons.
The school district maintains that
"white flight'' and a general shift in the
city's racial population has caused the
racial imbalance. Critics, on the other
hand, have questioned the School
Board's and the District's commitment
to the plan, since more than 20,000 out-
of-district permits have been issued
through 1977 (25 percent of the student -
population) allowing students to
transfer out of their schools which were
assigned to achieve a racial balance.
Now Redesign appears to suggest an
even more significant retreat from the
desegregation promised by Horseshoe.
Under the Horseshoe plan no ethnic
group in a school was to vary by more
than 15 percent above or below its
proportion in the general population.
That plan, however, has never ef-
fectively been carried out. The
segregation that existed before Hor-
seshoe still exists, and in some cases is
New issues in
To achieve equal educational op-
_ portunities California courts may, when
schools cannot be desegrated within a
single school district, order an inter-
district school desegration plan, ac-
cording to the ACLU's Board of
Directors, which authorized ACLU's
entry as friend of the court in an appeal
arising from a mid-peninsula school
desegregation suit - Tinsley v.
California.
The law suit which seeks to integrate
the predominantly black Ravenswood
School District with eight neighboring
districts which are largely white, raises
new issues in California law.
Plaintiffs in the case - 34 minority
and non-minority parents who reside in
Ravenswood and in the surrounding
districts - contend that school boards
and the State have an obligation under
the California Constitution to provide
equal educational opportunities.
This contention will be supported by
the ACLU of Northern and Southern
California if the Court of Appeal
permits the organizations to enter as
friends of the court.
The
Court in 1976 seeking to integrate their
segregated school districts through a
plan which crossed over school district
boundaries. Their petition was
dismissed by the trial court and they are
now appealing this dismissal in the
Court of Appeal.
Current California law egatding
equal education opportunities was
decided by the state high court in
Crawford v. Board of Education, a 1976
Tinsley plaintiffs filed their
lawsuit in the San Mateo Superior
worse, according to the NAACP.
With the court order still in force the
School District voluntarily submitted
their "`blueprint for reform" to Judge
Weigel for the federal court's approval
on April 17. The NAACP, in turn, has
challenged the School District proposal
- and asked that Judge Weigel reject the
school district plan, in part, because it
violates constitutional rights.
Negotiations between the two parties
-are taking place as the ACLU News
goes to press.
Is Redesign Separate But Equal?
According to ACLU attorney Alan.
Schlosser,
presented for court approval is
"fundamentally inconsistent with
constitutional principles ... and with
the letter and the spirit of the U.S.
District Court's 1971 order."
Schlosser claims that the proposal for
a "Bayview/Hunters Point Complex
thinly veils the stark fact that an entire
community - and one that is over-
whelmingly. black - has been pur-
posely excluded from the desegreation
efforts that Redesign purports to
implement for the rest of the school |
district.
"By authorizing the creation of a
`complex' of `one-race schools,'
defendants (the school district)) bear an
extremely heavy burden of justifying to
this court such a blatant departure
from the constitutional norms affirmed
and reaffirmed time and time again by
the United States Supreme Court since
Brown v. Board of Education,' Mr.
Schlosser said in a request to the court
that the ACLU enter the appeal as
amicus curiae.
Redesign does away with the 15
the Redesign plan being -
percent formula which Judge Weigel
had adopted for the _ school's
desegregation effort in 1971. It offers,
instead, a formula which provides a new
standard: a school can have up to 45
percent enrollment from one
racial/ethnic group and must have at
least four racial/ethnic groups in at-
tendance.
"On its face, this new formula ap-
pears to be a significant retreat from
the desegrative thrust of the Horseshoe
Plan, and raises the spectre of
`significant resegregation of the school
|
|
|
|
system,'' Schlosser stated.
- Schlosser asserts that, `"`such a step
backwards cannot be justified merely
by the defendants' statement that the
Horseshoe Plan's formula is not im-
plementable."'
If no settlement is reached before
June 15 a hearing will be held before
Judge Weigel regarding PH SE) of
Redesign. ;
On May 12 Judge Weigel granted
ACLU permission to enter the case as a
friend of the court.
Mid-Pen case:
decision born out of litigation brought
in 1963 and still being handled by the .
ACLU of Southern California.
In Crawford the Supreme Court
rejected the distinction between de jure
segregation - where it must be shown
that acts of state or school district
officials are a substantial cause of racial
segregation - and de facto segregation
- where segregated school districts
result from housing patterns, rather
than from state or local school districts
committing acts contributing to the
segregation of the schools.
The Crawford decision held that the
very existence of segregation, regardless
of cause, violates the state constitution,
and requires the adoption of reasonably
feasible means to eradicate the evil.
According to ACLU Staff Counsel
Alan Schlosser, the issue of inter-district
remedies under the "reasonable
feasible' guidelines has not yet been
reviewed by the California Supreme
Court, and the Tinsley suit is expected
to be the first case to receive con-
sideration of this constitutional
question.
The U.S. Supreme Court held in 1974
(Milliken v. Bradley) that before a court
orders an inter-district school
desegregation remedy, there must be
evidence that neighboring local school
districts, or the state, intentionally
contributed to the school's segregation.
The plaintiffs argue that the
California rule, that desegregation may
be ordered even without proof of intent
to segregate should allow an inter-
district remedy whenever necessary to
achieve effective desegregation.
But imposing constitutional stan--
dards on complex social issues is not
always as easy as it sounds, as ACLU's
Board of Directors found out when the
Board was urged, by petition, to
reconsider its March decision to enter
the case by an inter-racial group of
concerned citizens representing the
Ravenswood School District, at their
April meeting. a
This viewpoint is held by the all-
black Ravenswood school board which
is on record in opposition to the inter-
district remedy proposed by the Tinsley
plaintiffs.
It is also supported by at least 300
residents who signed the peititions
asking that the ACLU's Board of
Directors reconsider their decision to
enter the Tinsley law suit. The petition
supporters are lead by the Committee
for Community Forum on Education
who brought spokespeople to the April
meeting.
The 95% black Ravenswood District
has had a series of stormy struggles
regarding school desegregation during.
the last ten years ... struggles which
have caused a great number of black
parents to reject the notion that school
desegregation is a worthy objective.
Instead, at least one group, which
addressed the Board, takes a separatist
view that local control would be a
greater goal for parents and students to
work for in order to achieve quality
education.
Desegregation at the high school level
has been a painful experience for some
Ravenswood residents who explained
that an earlier plan to integrate |
secondary school students resulted in
closing their own Ravenswood High
School. Many black parents found that
this eliminated their influence in ee
secondary education.
- Opposing the Ravenswood group at
the meeting was an NAACP
representative and other Tinsley
desegregation advocates who argued
that desegregation was necessary
during the elementary school ex-:
perience, and that the Ravenswood
parents were discouraged, in part,
because it may be too late to achieve the
promise of equal educational op-
portunities at the high school level.
Moreover, proponents of the Tinsley
suit claimed that they in fact were
supported by many black parents in the
Ravenswood school district, who
disagreed with the Educational Forum
group's proposal for local control.
The dialogue engaged in by ACLU
Board Members, staff, representatives
of the Tinsley plaintiffs, and the
Community Forum group was fruitful.
Although ACLU Board members
were sensitive to concerns raised by the
Ravenswood committee, such as their
opposition to any one-way busing plan,
the actual plan for desegregation will
not be addressed by either the HEE
or the ACLU in the appeal.
Throughout the discussion it was
made clear that the ACLU's role in the
litigation would be focused upon the
constitutional grounds upon which the
entire appeal is based. At this stage the
Tinsley appeal does not ask the court to
consider engineering an equitable inter-
district desegregation plan. |
`Therefore the board reached a unani-
mous decision to maintain ACLU's
`position to enter the Tinsley case as a
friend of the court on the specific issue
of whether the state courts have the
constitutional obligation to order de-
segregation involving more than a
single "school district absent proof of
intentional segregation - the so-called
`metropolitan approach' to desegre-
gation.
Schlosser intends to argue that the
metropolitan approach can be ordered,
if necessary, because in California the
very existence, not- the cause of
segregated schools is the constitutional -
evil which must be remedied. |
"There may be no restraints imposed
upon reasonable and feasible relief
ordered which promises to root out
segregated school conditions,' ac-
cording to Mr. Schlosser.
The Tinsley plaintiffs will file their
opening brief later this month.
May 1978
aclu news
By David M. Fishlow
Executive Director -
No issue in the recent history of the ACLU has
attracted so much public attention, nor occasioned so
much discussion within the ACLU, as has the decision
of the Illinois Division to attack three unconstitutional
parade ordinances passed when a group of `"`American
Nazis'"' announced their intention to march in the
Chicago suburb of Skokie.
_ The controversy - more illusory than real -
centers not on the policy questions involved, but
`Tam a gay man, but if Anita Bryant or
Senator Briggs decide to parade through
the Castro, I trust you will also defend
their rights to demonstrate. '' Amember in support
rather on the identity of the plaintiffs.
The ordinances, already used to deny a parade
permit to the Jewish War Veterans, have three main
provisions:
e A demonstration by any group of 50 or more
persons requires a permit issued on 30 days notice by
the Village of Skokie
e "Political organizations'' may not demonstrate
in `military style'' uniforms.
e@ `Symbols offensive to the community" may not
be displayed in any demonstration, and there may be
no distribution of literature which ascribes a "lack of
virtue'' to any ethnic group.
Finally, Village officials may suspend any of the
requirements of the parade ordinances if in their
judgment enforcement is unnecessary for a particular
group of whom they happen to approve.
In addition to the three ordinances, the demon-
stration by the Illinois Nazis, only one of half a dozen
feuding successor groups to George Lincoln Rock-
well's National Socialist White People's Party, oc-
casioned a determination by the Village Council that
henceforth demonstrations in the Village would
require insurance bonds of $350,000.
Were any other group in the United States the
plaintiffs in the Illinois case, it is unlikely that the
Skokie ...
What have
we eained?
bitter controversy now roiling the waters of the Union
would have arisen; protection of the right to
demonstrate regardless of one's political views is
nothing new for the ACLU. One pamphlet on why the (c)
ACLU sometimes defends the Nazis was written by
Roger Baldwin in 1937.
Here in Northern California, the reaction of the
membership to the Illinois case seems to be much
milder than that expressed elsewhere. Perhaps it is the
nature of people in this part of the country to be more
tolerant of diversity, even when the divergent pass
beyond mere kookiness on to the limits of repugnance.
There may be a direct relationship between the fact
that Northern California has roughly twice the
national average of ACLU membership per capita -
and the fact that we have received less mail than other
affiliates over the Nazi issue.
... Which is not by any means to say that we have
not felt the heat to some degree. Slowly, however, the
job of educatirig our membership and the general
public to the true nature of the issues involved, seems
to be more successful.
In a Sacramento Chapter meeting in early May, for
example, well over a hundred ACLU members heard a
presentation on the issue, participated in a question
and answer session, and clearly indicated their general
support for the ACLU position. Other meetings have
been much the same.
The objections from our membership to ACLU
participation in the case usually fall into one of two
broad categories: there are those who say the Nazis are
so far beyond the pale of human decency that they
ought to be disqualified from
protection; and the second group, while reluctantly
Prop. 9 challenge to high court
In the wake of a November Los Angeles Superior Court
climate which existed that year.
admitting that Nazis have rights, too, object to the
_ACLU's expenditure of ``resources" - time and
money - on their problems.
_ The real resentment - and the often vituperative
mail - comes in because many members felt sur-
prised. Perhaps if we all had thought about the issue
calmly, in advance of its having heated up, there
would have been less shock, but things don't work that
way, and it is indeed difficult to learn from screaming
headlines that an organization to which one belongs
has "rushed in" to aid a terrible cause. The almost
inevitable sense of betrayal is frequently transmuted
into a feeling of injury, and hurt feelings often are
expressed in angry letters - this time, of resignation
constitutional _
6
`. . there are some things in this world
that are just not right, that just cannot be
accepted in a civilized society. "
A member opposed
from the ACLU.
I will risk the suggestion, however, that in the long
run the Skokie problem may turn out to have had
some benefit for this organizaten, and for the United
States as a whole.
It has occasioned more discussion and public
debate over the right of free speech than even the anti-
war movement occasioned in any one-year period. It
has caused the ACLU privately to rededicate itself,
and publicly to declare itself, solemnly and immutably
dedicated to the principle that the right to vigorous
public expression of political views may not be in-
terfered with by government officials who find the
views repugnant.
And those Americans who think and talk and argue
about the issue, even if they think the ACLU dead
wrong and the Village of Skokie dead right, are ac-
tively debating the advisability or necessity of that
abstraction known as "free speech" or, more properly,
"free thought." As long as that debate continues, the
people will be keeping the principle alive. When the
discussion no longer makes anybody mad - on either
side - then we will be in real trouble.
The ACLU's action has occasioned this public
debate. What a fine use for ACLU resources! How
fundamental to ACLU. How healthy for America.
Now I'll answer some more mail. . .
decision which threw out, in its entirety, Proposition 9 - the
1974 Political Reform Act - the ACLU of Northern California
has joined the Institute of Governmental Advocates as amicus
curiae in the appeal of the Superior Court decision currently
before the State Supreme Court. ;
ACLU attorneys argue that a section of the act, which pro-
hibits lobbyists from making any financial contribution to a
candidate, for statewide office, is unconstitutional.
The Fair Political Practices Commission is appealing the
decision rendered by Superior Court Judge Parks Stillwell.
The Institute of Governmental Advocates who originally
brought the suit to the lower court successfully argued that
Proposition 9 was unconstitutional for three reasons: They first
claim that it presented more than one issue to the voters at the
same time, which violates the constitutional guidelines for
initiative measures.
Their second contention is that the statute's $10 limitation
on gifts to legislators by lobbyists is irrational.
And finally they maintain that the statute's absolute
prohibition on political contributions by lobbyists to can-
`didates for statewide office violates both the First and
Fourteenth Amendments.
In April, the ACLU's Board of Directors decided to enter the
suit as a friend of the court on the basis of constitutional
questions raised by the third claim regarding the acts violation
of the right to free speech and association and the right to
equal protection.
According to Ruth Simon, a volunteer attorney representing
`the ACLU in this action, "the political atmosphere which
existed in the nation and in the state at the time of the
proposition's acceptance by the voters in 1974 may have
caused the act's authors to overlook, or deliberately disregard,
the constitutional rights of lobbyists."
Coming on the heels of Watergate, and viewed as a major
reform to do away with political corruption and as an attempt
to blunt the impact which `special interest' groups had on the
legislative process, Proposition 9 received majority support on
the 1974 June ballot.
In fact, the ACLU's Board of Directors chose not to take a
position for or against the popular issue in the post-Watergate
Since that time, in a case brought by the national ACLU,
Buckley v. Valeo, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that
political contributions do constitute both a form of political
expression and an act of political association protected by the
First Amendment.
The section of California's law which the ACLU is
challenging works as follows: No contribution can be made by
any lobbyist to the campaigns of elective state officials,
regardless of whether a lobbyist has ever or could ever have
occasion to even meet, let alone lobby, that official. A lob-
byist's employer, however, is free to make unlimited con-
tributions under California law. `
The stated purpose of this absolute prohibtion, according to
the statute, is to "rid the political system of the appearance
and actuality of corruption and improper influence." The
`defendant Fair Political Practices Commission maintains that
this prohibition is justified because of the peculiarly sensitive
role that lobbyists play in influencing legislative decision-
making. |
Although criminal laws already exist which prohibit bribery
and other forms of political corruption, the Fair Political
Practices Commission argues that this statute is not simply to
prevent corruption, but to prevent the public's confidence in
the legislative process from being undermined by campaign
expenditures by lobbyists, or just simply to prevent the "`ap-
pearance" of corruption.
| ACLU advocates disagree, and explain to the high court that
jfor the government to deny one special group - lobbyists -
lan essential means of participating in the political process,
there must be a compelling and rational reason.
The defendant's contention, that such a right be given up by
lobbyists to create an illusion of a corruption-free legislative
| process, is `"`an exchange which is not only unworkable, but
unconstitutional,' particularly when the law allows cir-
cumvention by the employers of a lobbyist who can make
unlimited political contributions, according to the amicus
curiae brief.
A hearing on the issues is scheduled for June 5 before the
State Supreme Court. Common Cause, People's Lobby, the
sa1uaq?T [tar `uoryeor[qnd ATyUOW-1q NDY [eUOHeU ay} 10} St s}U99 QC pue
SMIU NJID JY} 0} UOTAIJOSQNs and JO} SI $}U99 OS Yor Jo `dn pue Oz diyssoquisyy
SPSb-LLL - EOI H6 VIMLOSIDD `OdSIOUDLT UDE `TOE "AIS - 1S UOISSIP p18
OPOSTO JoquiNN] Uoreorqnd
oypA `Yousy sy My2010q
AOPIIIG] SaAyNsex'yY `wo7ys1.7 "PY Plavg wosisdAeyD `uvnwzyyg uasivs,
BIUIOF [ED UIOYON Jo UOTUL SaHJaqr] [ALD URoLOULY ay} Aq poysi[qng
DIULOfIID) `OISIIUDLY UE 1D pazL4OYIND Sasaiaiad po ssv]D puovags
daquiadaq -daquiaao0ny pun saquiajdag-isnanyp
`Ayng-aune `Kaonaga.q-Cavnuve ui A]yquow-1q 1daoxa Ayyjuow `Ava p sanssi 9
SAOU NPE
Sierra Club and the Attorney General have submitted friend of See
the court arguments on the side of the FPPC.
May 1978
aclu news
1978-ACLU Board of
Who is eligible to vote:
By-laws for the ACLU of Northern
California call for the at-large Directors
of the Board to be elected by the
"general membership." The `general
membership" is those members `in
good standing' who have renewed their
membership within the last twelve ~
months. .
The label affixed to this issue of
ACLU News indicates whether you are
eligible, or not eligible, to vote on the
`basis of when your last membership
renewal contribution was recorded.
If you are not eligible to vote, you
may choose to renew your membership
at the same time you submit your
ballot, and resume your membership `in
good standing.'
If you share a joint membership, each
individual is entitled to vote separately
- two spaces are provided on the ballot
located on the opposite page.
How are the candidates nominated to
run for the Board of Directors?
The By-laws permit two methods of
nomination. Some candidates were
nominated by the present Board of
Directors after consideration of the
nominating committee's recom-
mendations. Others were nominated by
petitions, bearing the signatures of at.
least fifteen ACLU members.
How many members of the Board are to
be elected?
Eighteen candidates are running to
fill thirteen positions on the Board of
Directors, for either three year terms, or
to fill unexpired terms, beginning in
September, 1978.
How does a member vote?
Instructions appear on the oppsite
page. The deadline for submitting your
ballot to the ACLU office is Monday,
June S.
For your consideration, the following
statements were submitted by the
nineteen candidates for election to the
Board of Directors.
Irving R. Cohen
In the face of what I see as a steadily
increasing anti-civil libertarian climate
in the country, I think the ACLU must
continue to explore new areas (such as
free speech within the corporation),
while strengthening its role as protector
of the more traditional areas.
Organizationally, I see our greatest
strength and greatest weakness as the
same: our membership. Since the
weakness lies in its under-utilization, I
believe that all levels of the ACLU must
work to strengthen the peed presence
in the community.
I have been a chapter member, -
chapter chairperson (Marin), No. Cal
Board member, National Board (at
present), and briefly, Acting Executive
Director. I make my living as a self-
employed custom cabinet-maker, with a
minor role as film critic, and occasional
forays into novel writing.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Marlene De Lancie
Many of my |
activities in.
recent years
have centered -
around hu--
man rights.
My present
service on th
District Advi
sory Commit
tee for Compensatory Education re-
- sulted directly from nine years' involve-
ment at every level of community/
school interaction to desegregate schools
voluntarily and to bring about their
integration.
As board member of the Child Care
Coordinating Council of San Mateo
County, I serve as treasurer and
funding chairperson.
Within ACLU, as a full-time
volunteer, I coordinate the Coalition
Against the Death Penalty with 80
member-organizations, and assist with
organization of Bill of Rights Day fund-
raising efforts. :
To promote greater presence and
understanding of ACLU and its defense
of the Bill of Rights, and to bring
ACLU closer to its constituents, I am
co-sponsoring the establishment of a
northern Peninsula chapter.
Incumbent: No :
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Jerome B. Falk, jr.
ACLU vol-
unteer counsel
in dozens of
cases since
1966, includ-
ing capital
punishment,
school deseg-
gregation, fair
housing, free
speech, loyalty oaths, obscenity, Zebra
stop and frisk, student rights, and others.
Former member of ACLU-NC Board and
Chairman of Legal Committee. Presently
ACLU Advisory Counsel.
_ Graduated Boalt Hall in 1965. Law
Clerk, Justice William Douglas (1965-
66). Practicing lawyer in San Francisco
and lecturer in law at Boalt Hall.
Very often, the ACLU is the only
source of assistance for those whose
civil liberties have been denied. Its
Board must see that no matter how
unpopular the cause or the client,
violations of our basic freedoms do not
go unchallenged.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors.
Gail Ann Fujioka
I serve as Field Representative for
The Youth Project's Western Office, a
private foundation which supports
emerging grass roots, action-oriented,
social justice organizations around the
country. I have taught in the Asian
American Studies Department at UC
- Davis and have served as the National
Youth Director and in the Washington,
D.C. office of the Japanese American
Citizens League. I presently serve on the
Board of Governors of the Asian Law
Caucus and am a member of the
Chinatown YWCA and the San
Francisco JACL.
The ACLU
should continue to
working. for' the
California chapter
initiate dialogues - with ethnic com-
munities regarding the issue of First
slated in ACLU's work, and in con-
tinuing to keep the issue of civil liberties
in the forefront of people' s concern and
activism.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Cherie A. Gaines
I am a practicing attorney presently
EEOC (handling
employment discrimination trials in
federal court), previously with the
poverty program legal services offices in
Alameda County. I have also served on
the Boards of the ACLU Berkeley-
Albany Chapter, the Consumers Co-op
of Berkeley, the Berkeley Neighborhood
Legal Services Foundation, and in
many community organizations, ac-
tivities and efforts. My professional and
volunteer work, as well as my daily life,
have all involved me in major areas of
civil liberties concern including police
practices, school policies, controversial
free speech issues, etc. ;
I believe in a broad interpretation of
ACLU's role and I would like for the
ACLU to have a direct impact affecting
the exercise of individual rights in-
practice as well as theory.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Linda K. Hanten
As a staff attorney for the Mexican
American Legal Defense and
Educational Fund, (MALDEF), a major
U.S. civil rights organizaton, I feel that
I can bring to the ACLU-NC the in-
sights I have gained working as an
advocate of people's rights.
My work at- MALDEF has been
employment discrimination litigation
and the Chicana Rights Project, which
seeks to remedy the problems Mexican
American women face as a result of
national origin and sex discrimination.
I feel it important that the
achievements of the ACLU be
presented to the public more positively.
Many of my colleagues and fellow
Mexican Americans either do not know,
or know very little, of the role ACLU
plays in endeavoring to bring legal
justice to all segments of American
society.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Sylvan M. Heumann
I am currently President ot
Metropolitan Furniture Corporation. I
have been active in the business
community as an officer or board
member of various small corporations
and trade organizations over a thirty
year period.
I have gained some experience in real
estate and investments and hope to be
able to contribute to the guidance of the
ACLU financial programs.
I was Chairman of the Northern
BEM (Business
Executives Move for Vietnam Peace). I
have also worked on charities and with
Amendment rights, how this is tran-.
minority groups in business.
Have recently been involved with
ACLU as a member of the Development
and Finance Committees.
Incumbent: No .
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Donna J. Hitchens
I am the
director and
staff attorney
for the Les-
bian Rights
Project and
work part time
with Equal
Rights Advo-
cates. I am in- :
volved in litigation and community edu-
cation concerning the rights of women
and gay people. Prior to becoming a law-
yer and moving to California, I was a
member of the ACLU of Maine.Over the
last ten years I have been involved in the
civil liberties struggle and have viewed it
as an important tool in combating
oppression based on race, sex, eco;
nomics, age and politics.
Because of the continued and
intensified intrusion on the rights of
individuals, the ACLU of Northern
California has a dual responsibility: 1)
to aggressively and creatively oppose
these intrusions, and 2) to encourage
others to actively participate in the
: struggle.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Naomi Lauter
Assistant Director of the Jewish
Community Relations Council. Also
serves on the KQED board and as
President of Organize.
ACLU activities: Presently is Vice
Chairperson of Northern California
ACLU and chairperson of the Legis-
lative Committee; served on the
Citizens Committee to integrate the San
Francisco School district; have been
active in Democratic politics and the
civil rights movement of the 1960s and
is past chairperson of Friends of SNCC
of the Bay Area.
I believe the ACLU is an essential .
organization for the diligent pursuit of
the protections guaranteed in our Con-
stitution, which I believe to be the most
important idea in the United States.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Charles C. Marson
I was on the
almost a
decade, a
legislative
representative
(1968-72) and
legal directo
(1972-77).
I remain active on the legal com-
mittee and as a volunteer lawyer and
contributor.
As our society, economy, politics, and
technologies evolve, ACLUNC's views
and strategies must evolve with them -
beyond the First Amendment into
difficult issues of privacy, poverty, and
of Directors election
discrimination; beyond the courthouse
into the legislative and administrative
arenas.
Yet this evolution must be selective
lest we lose what we have won in our
traditional areas of concern. Our
resources are tiny, our strength depends
upon the quality of our effort, and the
temptation to endorse a hundred
righteous causes is continuing.
`The resulting choices are hard. If
elected I would bring to them all the
experience and energy I can.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Caryl Mezey
47 years old;
present ACLU
Board mem-
ber; Commis-
sioner, San
Francisco Hu-
man Rights
Commission;
Vice Presi-
dent, Chil- on
dren's Rights group; Finance Commit-
tee, Legal Defense Fund; Member,
League of Women Voters, National
Women's Political Caucus, SPUR. Past
activity in PTA, Richmond complex -
advisory council. Four children
educated in San Francisco public
schools. Husband Peter, member of
San Francisco Board of Education.
Wide involvement in labor, ethnic com-.
munities and neighborhood groups.
Presently coordinator of campaign of
San Franciscans Against Jarvis-Gann.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Iris Mitgang
Seen ;
National Vice-
Chair, Nation-
al Women's
Political Cau-
cus; Continu-
ing Committee
of the Confer-
ence, Interna-
tional Wo-
men's Year, Houston; National Board
member, NWPC ERA Fund; Consumer
member, governing body, Alameda-
Contra Costa Health System; Attorney,
Oakland-Walnut Creek (employment
discrimination/family law); Publications
on Immigration; Instructor legal
' research, U.C. Davis School of Law;
Editorial Board U.C. Davis Law Boy,
experienced lobbyist.
Commitment: A strong feminist
presence - to keep the vigil and to
expand our commitment: to equal
rights, children's rights, the rights of
privacy and the right to choose; to open
the political and institutional processes
to the under-represented, the under-
served, and to bring political
knowledge, and the perspective,
commitment and energy for change.
I would be honored to serve.
Incumbent: No.
Nominated by: Board of Directors
and Petition
. Warren Saltzman
- forces which
I believe we should not only assure
peoples' right to speak, but should alse
pay attention to what they say. I have
tried to do that in my position as
Chairperson of ACLU-NC.
After being elected to the Board in
1968, I helped strengthen the role of our
Chapters and had them represented on
the Board. I organized the first annual
Chapter-Board Conference and helped
build the San Francisco Chapter,
serving as its President.
In 1965, I joined other Bay Area
lawyers and court reporters who took
depositions in Mississippi to prove to
Congress that the State had
systematically prevented Blacks from
voting. Later, as Chairperson of the
State Commission on Equality in
Education, I worked toward integrating
schools_
throughout California.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Pat Schultz
In my position as Adminstrative
Brown, I have ample opportunity to
work in the legislative arena on "`civil
liberties" issues. In addition, because
of our office's well known involvement
in issues of discrimination, individual
rights and unpopular causes, I devote
much energy to individual cases of
abuse.
My experience on the ACLU Board -
provides breadth and support to my
work with the Legislature and my legis-
lative experience brings a different, and -
I believe needed, viewpoint to the
ACLU Board. Although an incumbent,
T have only served for a short time and
would like to continue for another term.
Incumbent: Yes _
- Nominated by: Board of Directors
Frances C. Strauss
I have been
a member of
the ACLU
since 1953 and
from then un-
til 1955 was
administrative
secretary of
the Illinois
Division;
from 1956 until removal laSon Fre rancisco -
in 1960, served on its Board of Directors.
on its Board as Secretary and as its
Chapter Representative to the ACLU-
NC. Currently, a member of its Board
and Executive Committee.
Have been active in ACLU-NC for a
number of years; established the
Complaint Desk Service in 1972. Since
1973, have been primarily responsible
for the ACLU-NC Foundation's Bill of
Rights fundraising campaigns in
support of our legal program. Currently
serving the ACLU-NC as Secretary-
Treasurer and board member at large.
Incumbent: Yes
Nominated by: Board of Directors _
Pablo Tellez
It has been -
my experience, - /
both subjective: -
and observed,
that those |
violate and -
diminish the
individual's
worth are
in San Francisco and
Assistant to Assemblyman Willie.
~ gon and HUAC
all too ready to encroach upon those
principles and agreements by which we
choose to order our lives. Ethics,
morality and responsibility have
become victims of situational defini-
tions twisted by selfish abuse of power.
I believe that there are good and
honest persons who seek to sustain and
enlarge the concerns for human dignity.
Since this effort is based on integrity, it
is a struggle faced with great resistance
and adversity; there are elements that
-would subvert truth and freedom to ~
their own means. Yet, however
difficult, those persons truly concerned
must not waiver. The protection of our
civil liberties is the primary line of
defense.
- Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Board of Directors
Michael E. Vader
Manager of the State of California's
Affirmative Action Program for the
_ Disabled responsible for policy for-
mulation and_ statewide' im-
plementation. Past Commissioner of
the Fair Employment Practices
Commission and current President of
the California Coalition of Minorities,
Women and the Disabled. Also serves
on the Board of Directors of the Legal
Center for the Elderly and Disabled;
Deaf Self-Help, Inc.; Far West TTY,
Inc.; and Disabled in State Service.
In addition, active in the California
Association for the Physically Han-
dicapped, the Human Rights Com-
mission, the Foster Grandparents
Program, Resources for Independent
Living, the Developmental Disabilities
Council, and current and past member
of numerous committees and
organizations dedicated to furthering
opportunities and promoting equality
for disadvantaged persons.
Incumbent: No
: Nominated by: Board of Directors
David M. Weitzman
Attorney
for 13 years:
Pendleton 14;
Abbie Hoff-
man flag
shirt; Penta-
demonstra-
tors. 1965 -
Exec. Sec.
District of
Columbia
~ACLU; Co-
founder and Vicechairperson of ACLU of
Virginia; Boards of D.C., Virginia and
Berkeley.
Responsible in part for election
procedure reform in Affiliate. Believe
Affiliate has been disdainful of Chap-
ters; is too inbred; has not fully utilized
attorneys, chapters, volunteers; that it
should represent more citizens who are
mistreated by police.
I believe that the full support of free
speech for even the most unpopular
cause does not require aiding and
abetting groups which constitute a
criminal conspiracy to deprive others of
their civil rights when the group has
already acted upon their beliefs to kill,
maim, and batter others.
Incumbent: No
Nominated by: Petition
May 1978
aclu news and
Instructions for voting:
Candidates are listed 1 below tl
in alphabetical order. Vote for 0x00A7
no more than 13 candidates.
After marking your ballot, clip i
it and seal it in an envelope.
mailing label from this issue of i
the ACLU News, and place it on and
the upper left-hand corner of fl
the envelope as your return 0x00A7
address: Address the envelope g
to:
ACLU of Northern California :
Elections Committee 5
814 Mission Street, Suite 301
San Francisco, California 94103 i
The special mailing
must be included with your g
ballot in order to assure voting i
eligibility, as well as to help us rr
keep track of who has voted. ;
If this is a joint membership, fl
you may use both columns 0x00A7
provided, and each of the g
members may vote separately. i
lf you wish to insure the #
confidentiality of your vote,
insert your ballot in a double
envelope, with the special 0x00A7
mailing label on the outer. The 0x00A7
envelopes will be separated g
before the counting of the g
ballots. .
i
Ballots must be returned to i
the ACLU office before noon on 0x00A7f
Monday, June 5, 1978. I
Vote for no more than 13 Ss
candidates. (Joint members
have 13 votes EACH.) ;
Joint members use _ both 0x00A7f
columns. i
(26 eS Se See
: Ballot a
: IvingR.Cohen OF CO :
i MarleneDeLancie | U g
; Jerome B. Falk,jr. OF :
i GailAnnFujioka OF OO fF
: CherieA.Gaines (c) U :
i LindaK.Hanten CF OC 9
: SylvanM.Heumannt] CU ;
0x00A7 Donna J. Hitchens (1 OU JI
? q Naomi Lauter Ee :
gCharlesC.Marson O UC
`ll Caryl Mezey Bd :
t iris Mitgang el |
: Warren H.Saltzmanl) UT :
g Pat Schultz i] a 4g
i FrancesC.Strauss [1 U JI
I pabloTellee OF Of
g MichaelE.Vader C CJ 0x00A7g
; David M. Weitzman LU :
ee
Peel off the self-adhesive #
label 0x00A7
we
May 1978
aclu news
`On the line' for eight years
Margaret Smith will tell you that all
it really takes is the ability to "`listen,"'
but if you ask anyone who has
``listened'' to her respond to calls from
_ "friends in need" during her eight years
as a volunteer on the ACLU's Com-
plaint Desk, they will tell you it takes
muchmore.
Since the inception of the ACLU's
Complaint Desk service, Margaret
Smith has donated one day each week
to ``listen'' to every imaginable legal or
non-legal problem which confronts the .
ACLU office each day. This month will
make the end of Margaret's valuable
stay with the ACLU of Northern
California.
For many of us, civil liberties is
something we work for in the halls of
the Capitol or legislative chambers, or
in. a pristine courtroom. But for
Margaret Smith, her eight other
colleagues who staff the `front desk'
each week, and the countless numbers
of ACLU chapter activists who staff
"complaint" lines from Santa Rosa to
Monterey, working for civil liberties is
responding to real people with real
problems.
And working ``on the line' isn't an
easy task. Most people who call the
ACLU do not have what could be
defined as a "`civil liberties" problem.
They call the ACLU because they want
a divorce, or because they were
unhappy with the job the mechanic did
on their car, or because they were
arrested for drunk driving.
In reflecting upon the challenging,
yet often thankless job, Ms. Smith notes
that, ``We do offer a valuable service.
We are able to help a lot of people, who
wouldn't have anywhere else to turn.
Working with the legal staff, we come
up with ideas, and often we can help
people in need even if their problem
isn't just about their individual rights.
At the very least, just talking it over, for
many people, makes a big difference."'
Many callers do have civil liberties
problems, They feel that they have been
discriminated against - because of
race, because of their sexual preference,
and most often, according to Ms.
Smith, "they are facing insoluble
problems because they are poor.
"We try to help them, to advise them
by consulting with the ACLU's legal
staff who research the`law, and we call
them back, letting them know what
avenues are open to them to work out
their problems.
"But the buck stops at the ACLU,"
deal about
according to Ms. Smith, who is very
cautious about making unsatisfactory
referrals to inappropriate agencies and
says that, "`it is `no favor' to people who
_urgently need assistance. Some people
call who don't have a legitimate
complaint - and most often they are
referred to the ACLU by some other
agency who just wanted to placate
them.
- Directly dealing with ACLU's
"public''. has not been the only job
which Ms. Smith has eagerly un-
dertaken within the ACLU. She has
been an ACLU member for more than
25 years, and, in fact, began volun-
teering over ten years ago to thank the
organization for providing her with
information for her own civil liberties
problem, many years before the
Complaint Desk was even established.
Margarget Smith is enthusiastic
about what she has learned about
constitutional rights, although she sadly
notes that "`I've also learned a great
what the constitutional
doesn't cover, and that is ways to help
the poor." ee
Deborah Boyce, staff coordinator of
the Complaint Desk volunteers, noted
that, "The kind of volunteer like
Margaret Smith is hard to replace. Her
patience and sensitivity is enriched by
eight years of experience as an advisor,
consoler, and teacher to so many
hundreds of ACLU callers. That
background is just invaluable."
Members interested in volunteering
for the Complaint Desk should call
Deborah Boyce (415) 777-4545 for
further information.
Mental Patients' Right to Refuse Treatment
Tuesday, May 30 - 12:00 Noon
Wednesday, May 31 - 7:30 P.M.
KPFA Radio - FM 94.1 (Bay Area)
KFCF Radio - FM 88.1 (Fresno)
Does Doctor know best . . . or should mental patients have
the right to refuse such treatments as shock therapy, psycho-
surgery, or mind-altering drugs?
The medical, ethical and legal aspects of this current controversy will be
discussed by ACLU voluntary attorney, Mort Cohen, who recently filed a
class action suit to halt the forced administration of psychotropic drugs,
members of the medical profession, and others. You can join the debate by
calling (415) 848-4425.
The Civil Liberties Radio Education Project is funded by the California
Council for the Humanities in Public Policy, and is produced for KPFA by
Peabody Award winner Adi Gevins.
`Zebra Gul
continued from page I
which regulates boxing in California, to
rescind its regulation. Ms. Crosby
argued that the regulation
discriminated solely on the basis of sex
and denied women boxers the right to
due process since the rule presumes,
without evidence, that all women are
incapable of competing in longer bouts.
The State Athletic Commission, at its
May 9 meeting, voted to rescind its
present policy, having received
arguments from Ms. Crosby explaining:
| why it must do so.
The Commission agreed with the
ACLU's position and ruled that in the
future all applicants, male and female,
wishing to compete in longer bouts shall
be evaluated individually, on the basis
of their experience and ability, not on
the basis of their sex.
Although down, the ban may not be
out.
The policies relating to women
boxers are not final, since the Com-
mission decided to re-examine all of its
policies regulating female boxing
matches at its June meeting where it
will hear testimony from women boxers
as well as physicians specializing in
athletic-related medical problems.
For Shirley Tucker, the current
-ruling is not just a novel victory. It may
mean paying the rent and supporting
her two children, since women boxers
have suffered great financial hardships
`from the unequal treatment they have
- received under California's regulations.
Four round contests of two minutes
`Calm'
continued from page 1 ,
negotiate with the
department."'
Alba charged that the Sheriff's
department, without a proper hearing
procedure, was able to ignore citizens'
complaints of abuse, or to simply tell
community groups that `they don't
care,' when demands were made.
"The Santa Cruz County SWAT
team was formed secretly,' Alba said,
"their existence indicates a `storm
trooper approach' to law enforcement,
and a military response to social
local Sheriffs
problems, which is unnecessary. in
Santa Cruz and elsewhere.
"There is a lot of favorable com-
munity interest for the initiative
measures."' according to Alba, who is
currently organizing support for the
June election.
The police reform crusaders were
stunned by Judge Allen's April 3
decision, just three days before the
ballot was to be printed.
Judge Allen's order, in conjunction
with Proposition A, which would if
approved prohibit Santa Cruz police
from conducting guerilla warfare
training and, except where required by
State and Federal laws, banned the
`used of machine guns, indicated that
such a measure would hamper the
ability of law enforcement to function
effectively. In his opinion he stated
that:
"the F.B.1., for example, in going after a
modern Capone or Dillinger at his hideout in the
Santa Cruz mountains, would have to leave their
automatic weapons at the county line or face tort
actions by Dillinger's survivors for damages for
illegally using automatic weapons fire in a gun
battle. Not only the local sheriff, but all law en-
forcement agencies coming to his assistance
each do not fit into the scheme through
which boxing matchers are promoted.
Women boxers, of which there are
probably a dozen in California, were
regulated to what Zebra Girl described
as, "`novelty carnival' acts.
According to an article written by
Zebra Girl, "For a four-round fight, a
woman will get an average of $300.00. _
After paying her manager and trainer
she ends up with around $200.00." So
far it is difficult for women entering the
profession to even get one fight each
month promoted.
`Men can box 10 rounds for normal
fights and twelve to fifteen rounds for
championship fights. For these ten
rounders they receive on the average
$1,000 to $5,000,' Ms. Tucker ex-
plained. oS
Regardless of the economic impact of
the four-round limitation, ``sex
discrimination is unconstitutional,"
according to Ms. Crosby, who had first
been told by the state Commission that
the regulation existed to protect
"novices," and because boxing was
"`physically dangerous.''
"That boxing is a_ potentially
hazardous activity," Ms. Crosby ex-
plained in a letter to the Commission,
"is undoubtedly true,' however, under
California law, `facing danger is no
longer the exclusive prerogative of
males.
"This decision strikes down one more
barrier which blocks women from
pursuing whatever career they may
choose, no matter how male dominated
or unique that profession might be,"
Ms. Crosby said.
would be prohibited from using automatic wea-
pons to suppress a large riot, invasion of a small
coastal town by illegal gangs, to combat terrorist
seizure of public. officials, or public facilities,
newspapers, banks, or a Santa Cruz equivalent of
the Israeli wrestler massacre."
Proposition B, which establishes a
county-wide Law Enforcement Review
Commission providing for citizen
participation in ``setting and reviewing
law enforcement policies'? and
procedures to provide a means for
prompt, impartial, and fair in-
vestigation of complaints against the
law enforcement agencies under the
jurisdiction of the county, was also
declared "completely and totally in-
valid'? for much the same reasons as
Proposition A. In Judge Allen's view,
both measures go beyond the County or
the State's legislative authority. =
ACLU's emergency appeal claimed
that the CALM measures did not meet
the stiff test necessary for courts to
declare ballot measures invalid, and
successfully argued before the Supreme
Court that if the measures were
removed from the ballot, `the voters'
franchise will have been lost because
the Superior Court has abused its -
discretion by acting as a censor of
democracy, substituting its own views
on the wisdom of these measures in the
place of the electorate, even though the
invalidity of the measures is far from
clear. =
`A Court test of the validity of the
complex measures can come in due
course, after the election," Amitai Sch-
wartz said.
The Supreme Court decision allows
for Santa Cruz County voters to ap-
prove or reject the police conduct
measures through the use of their ballot
on June 6.
LEGISLATIVE ee
Initiative Watch redaie
By Mike Katz
Recent information indicates that
most of the six repressive initiatives
discussed in the last two issues of ACLU
News may fail to qualify for the
November California ballot.
As of May 11th, the only petitions
filed with county registrars were those
supporting the Briggs anti-gay teachers
initiative. There was evidence that
backers of each of the other five
initiatives were short of the required
number of signatures, and in telephone
interviews three ``proponents" actually
predicted defeat.
Each of the five proponents was given
a recommended deadline of May 4th for
gathering necessary signatures to
qualify for the November ballot; filing.
by the final deadlines listed below may
allow, but does not insure, inclusion on
that ballot.
Details regarding each initiative's
chances for qualification, where
available, are as follows:
Affirmative Action: Would ban
preferential treatment in school ac-
ceptance, hiring, and awarding of
Jarvis /Gann
continued from page I
rule may also make Jarvis-Gann un-
constitutional,'' Fishlow said. `For one
thing, nobody seems to know what `two-
thirds of the qualified electors' means.
Is that those who actually vote, those
who registered to vote, or those who are
citizens and old enough to vote? The
provision is so vague, and so important
to the whole system Proposition 13
would bring about, the whole thing may
be thrown out by the courts."
The ACLU's Board of Directors does
not take positions on taxation questions
unless some important constitutional
principle is involved, Fishlow explained.
"In this case the ACLU claims that
giving one-third of the voters in a
community twice as much power to
decide how that community raises and
spends its money as the other two-
thirds of the voters, is inequitable and
unconstitutional. There is a good
chance the courts will agree if
Proposition 13 passes and is
challenged."
During the Board's deliberation on
the Jarvis-Gann matter, which took
place at both the March and April
meetings, some members questioned
whether ACLU's position should en-
compass other concerns regarding the
threatened cut of such government
funded services as public defender
offices and other agencies whose
functions directly affect individual
rights, such as the right to counsel. The
Board's decision, however, was to
forego predictions on what items may or
may not be cut from local budgets, and
to consider only the concrete civil
liberties issue of one-person-one-vote at
this time.
government contracts. | Proponent
Lawrence Walsh's office says they have
only about 425,000 of the ap-
proximately 500,000 signatures needed
by June 30th, and predicts that they will
be short. Since 20-30 percent of the
signatures are commonly thrown out as
invalid, proponents must exceed the
minimum by at least that percentage.
Brigg's Initiative: Would make
homosexual conduct or its advocacy
grounds for firing school employees.
Briggs filed 640,000 signatures by the
May 1 deadline, amply exceeding the
312,404 minimum.
Abortion Funding: Would cut off
public funding for abortions except in
cases where the woman's life was en-
dangered. Proponent Joseph Gutheinz
says they are short of the 312,404
signatures needed by May 12, but plans
to introduce a new anti-choice initiative
during the summer. In the meantime,
_tentionally"'
murder. Briggs' campaign staffers are
perpetually optimistic, yet they do not
plan to file petitions until the May 26
deadline, and may well be short of the
312,404 valid signatures required.
Educational Opportunity: Would -
amend the California Constitution to
require desegregation of only "`in-
segregated _ schools.
According to the Los Angeles Times,
proponents claim to have about 500,000
signatures. However, 500,000 valid
signatures are required by June 12.
Farm Workers: Would restrict
agricultural employees' rights to
organize and carry out secondary
boycotts. Proponents report that they
are short, and say that "things look
dim." They are required to file 312,404
signatures by May 19.
Mike Katz is participating in a
community service program sponsored -
by Dartmouth College and is actively
own state assemblymember and sena-
tor, joining with members of ACLU's
Southern California affiliate who will be
flying up for a one-day visit on June 26,
and special programs with legislators,
media specialists and ACLU activists
who want to insure that this annual
gathering has an impact on legislation
in Sacramento.
Brent Barnhart, ACLU's legislative
advocate promises that the Conference '
will not be all ``business.'' For the
adventuresome, a tour of Capital
"night-life' will include visits to
"Frank Fats," the `Torch Club," and
other notorious legislative haunts.
The ACLU of Northern and Southern
California boasts nearly (c) 40,000
members. We are forces to contend
with, yet rarely have legislators had
occasion to meet us face-to-face. Here is
the opportunity for direct advocacy on
behali of the Bill of Rights. Join us and
the battle is being fought in the
Legislature. (See p. 7)
Death Penalty: Would provide for
increased use of capital punishment,
and longer sentences, for first degree
his two month
Francisco.
following the six initiative measures
which threaten civil liberties, as well as
working on other ACLU projects during
internship
help make our second conference a
significant event. [For further in-
formation in San Francisco call (415)
777-4545 or in Sacramento call (916)
442-1036.] (c)
in San
Abortion funds limited
In the March issue of the ACLU News we attempted to
explain the Legislature's budget process. The point was to
enable members to anticipate at what point the critical con-
frontation over Medi-Cal abortion funding might reach a
climax. Members might have been better served had we
predicted the unpredictable.
Instead of the most dramatic moments have occurred during
committee budget action, it happened on Wednesday, May 10,
when the Assembly Ways and Means Commitee passed out a
special deficiency appropriation bill carried by Assemblyman
Willie Brown.
On February 14, federal reimbursements for Medi-Cal
abortions were officially cut off by the Carter Administration,
pursuant to the dictates of the Hyde Amendment. AB 2967 was
then introduced by Assemblyman Brown at the behest of the
Governor, for the narrow purpose of providing state funds for
abortions from the time of the mid-February cut-off through
the end of June. However, amendments moved by Orange
County Democrat Richard Robinson added restrictions on the
use of Medi-Cal funds for abortions, which would have
remained in effect after the Brown bill had expired in June.
The Robinson amendments would have permitted Medi-Cal
abortions after the first three months, only in cases of rape,
statutory rape, incest, or when "severe and long lasting
physical health damage to the mother would result if the
pregnancy were carried to term when so determined by two
physicians."" Medi-Cal funds could also have been used to
terminate a pregnancy when a "child with major severe
permanent genetic or congenital abnormality' was predicted
by medical tests.
While Assemblyman Brown and Pro-Choice forces (including
Planned Parenthood, ACLU, NOW, and many other groups)
officially opposed the Robinson amendments, the Pro-Choice
`members of the Ways and Means Committee, lead by
Democrat Howard Berman, accepted the amendments as the
necessary price of gaining committee approval, and as a means
of improving the prospects for future funding of abortions
under Medi-Cal.
While the limitations on which abortions may be funded
under Medi-Cal were galling to Pro-Choice advocates, and of
questionable constitutionality under California's Equal
Protection and Right of Privacy clauses, AB 2967 will still
allow funding of approximatley 85 percent of the abortions
performed. On the negative side, the "`first-trimester" figure
will make Medi-Cal funding least available to the women most
prone to high-risk pregnancies: the poorest women who have
the least access to early and adequate pre-natal care, and
young teenagers who are least likely to seek medical attention
early enough. A reference to Penal Code Section 261.5 -
dealing with so-called "statutory rape' could encourage
teenagers under the age of consent to file official rape charges
against their teenage boyfriends as the only means of acquiring
a lawful abortion after the first trimester.
However, to the extent that AB 2967 with the Robinson
amendments is successful in keeping Medi-Cal funding
available at all, its passage through Assembly Ways and
Means is something for which we should be thankful. The bill
must still clear the Assembly floor by a two-thirds vote
(because it is an "urgency'' measure which would take im-
mediate effect), pass through the Senate Finance Committee,
and then clear the Senate floor by a two-thirds vote.
None of those remaining steps will be easy, and if AB 2967
fails at any of those steps, its passage through Ways and
Means on May 10th will have been of little significance. But
since it is still alive, and the compromise it represents may be
the definitive compromise that assures continued funding, it
would be useful to analyze who some of the players were, and
what role they played.
Outside Sacramento, important legislative developments
appear to be the result of large and elusive forces operating -
beyond the ken of the average citizen, and beyond the ability of
the average person to influence the outcome of important
issues. And in the retelling of legislative decisions by media
and by historians, the result takes on the aura of inevitability.
The final vote on AB 2967 in the Ways and Means Committee
was 12 to 8 with eleven needed for passage. Seven of the
members - liberal stalwarts Berman, Egeland, Fazio, Hart,
Knox, Torres and Alatorre - were expected in the initial head
count to vote "`aye'', as were two thoughtful and independent
Republicans, Assemblywoman Marilyn Ryan ard veteran
Assemblyman Frank Lanterman. In seeking the final two
votes, moderate Democrat Michael Wornum of Marin County
had early indicated he would vote "`aye,'"' but the eleventh vote
remained elusive.
The moderates who seemed "`possible'' included Democrats
Terry Goggin of San Bernadino, Tom Suitt of Palm Desert,
Bill McVittie of Upland, Richard Robinson of Santa Ana, and
Republican Richard Hayden of Los Gatos. However, either
from lack of concerted effort or the wrath of pro-Life forces in
their districts, it soon appeared that the only way to get an
"aye'' vote from any of them was to seek some sort of com-
promise.
Together with Assemblyman Howard Berman, Robinson
hammered out the conditions he wanted appended, and
McVittie indicated that he too would support the bill with the
Robinson amendments. Once that agreement was made, the
outcome in the committee hearing was predictable. Pro-Choice
and Pro-Life forces blasted away at each other in testimony,
Chairman Boatwright strove mightily to keep the hearing
moving, and the vote went down as predicted.
From the standpoint of ACLU members, however, the
essential point to bear in mind is that the result was not
predictable until effective efforts to get the eleventh vote had -
failed, and a compromise became the only path. In future bills
on future issues or at a later time in this same controversy, a
clearly articulated effort to convince a "`possible'' may make a
great difference in the shape and substance of the law we all
_ finally have to live under.
May 1978
aclu news
CHAPTERS
San Mateo group forms
A new Chapter of the American Civil
Liberties Union of Northern California
is forming in San Mateo County and we
invite you to join us at its first meeting:
Wednesday, May 31, 8:00 PM
Kloss Hall, Congregational Church
225 Tilton, in San Mateo
Refreshments will be served.
A panel of experts who participated
`at the recent Chapter-Board Con-
ference will discuss ne ballot
measures.
Gay Rights
"Winning and Losing in the Media
- for civil liberties and gay rights" is
the subject of the Gay Rights Chapter's
public meeting to be held on Wed-
nesday,
Macondray Hall of the First Unitarian
Church, 1187 Franklin Street, at Geary
Boulevard, in San Francisco.
Arthur J. Bressan, Jr., producers of
the widely-acclaimed film "Gay USA,"'
will present his ideas for successfully
influencing public opinion through the
media. Bressan will use audio-visual
material to demonstrate his points, and
will answer questions from the audience
afterwards.
The Unitarian Universalist Gay
Caucus of the San Francisco church
and the San Francisco Bay Area
Chapter of the Gay Academic Union
are co-sponsoring the meeting because
of wide interest in the subject during
this election year.
Mid-Peninsula
An attack on the nagging problem of.
responding promptly to persons calling
the ACLU for help was launched by the
Chapter at its monthly Executive Board
meeting April 27.
Alarmed by reports that responses
to distress calls have been delayed up to
a week, because of failure to check with
the answering service, the Board
decided to seek volunteers from its
membership to serve on the Watchdog
Committee.
"This breakdown of promptness is a
serious threat to our whole purpose and
function," said Leonard Edwards,
Chapter chairperson.
_ Volunteers `are asked to call Debbie
Ballinger, 984-0200 (day) or 961-4928
(evenings), or Chairperson Edwards at
287-6193 (label message ``ACLU''). The
answering service telephone number is
328-0732.
This issue
regarding the desirability of more
communication within the entire
chapter membership and ways to in-
volve members in chapter activities, in
order to build a closer cohesion on the
purpose of the ACLU.
In other matters, the Board also
discussed the complex civil liberties
issues involved in the closing of schools
and the transfer of students from one
school to another.
The next meeting will be held May
25, 8:00 PM, at the All Saints Episcopal
Church, 555 Waverley Street in Palo
Alto. Board meetings are open to the
public.
May 24th, 7:30 PM, in.
led to a discussion |
The ACLU of Northern California
has 14 active chapters - yet in nor-
thern San Mateo County, with almost
500 members, there is no chapter
organization. Because we need to
educate ourselves and our communities
on the repressive initiatives which are
proposed for the November ballot, it is
timely to establish a chapter in this
area. Civil liberties on a broad front are (c)
threated by these ballot measures - if
they qualify - and our effort to defeat
them will be much enhanced by the
existence of a local chapter.
Sacramento
David Fishlow was the featured
speaker at our general meeting and pot-
luck held on May 10th, where, in ad-
dition, the new Chapter By-Laws were
considered. An enthusiastic crowd of
over 100 members participated in the
event. -
Under the new By-Laws, Chapter
Board elections will take place during a
general meeting to be held in Sep-
tember. Members are invited to
nominate candidates for the offices of
president, vice-president, secretary,
treasurer, and for 6 of the remaining 13
Board positions. Nominees must be
current members who have renewed
during the last 12 months. Mail the
names of candidates to ACLU, c/o
Myra Schimke, 3518 Ronk Way,
Scaramento, 95821, before July 1.
Sonoma
Sonoma County Chapter now has a
telephone number! It is 544-HELP.
Negotiations were completed recently to
use the answering and referral service
for a trial period.
Members are needed for
screening `committee, which is
responsible for returning calls and
sorting out appropriate matters for our
volunteer attorneys. General mem-
bershp participation is vital to a viable
chapter with reasonable community
impact.
Board meetings are open. They are
held on the third Thursday of each
month, 7:30 PM, at 666 Seventh Street,
in Santa Rosa.
The next meeting will be held on
Thursday, May 18th, and the Chapter's
active involvement in the anti-initiative -
campaigns (as discussed at the Chapter
Conference) will be developed at that
time. Also, the Chapter is currently
dealing with several local matters which
`raise serious civil liberties questions.
Please join us.
Earl Warren
Three events are coming up next
month for members of the Earl Warren
Chapter.
Our annual pot luck dinner will be
held Saturday, June 10, 6:30 PM, at the
home of Florence Jurs, 6133 Estates
Drive in Oakland. Russell Bruno,
member of the Oakland School Board
will be the featured speaker. For further
information, call Dar Coppersmith,
522-2626 (evenings).
In addition, watch your mailbox for
details about two other activities - the
annual Board of Directors election, and
a "`mythical cake sale' fundraiser.
the
Mt. Diablo
Recent efforts by the Mt. Diablo
Chapter to separate coroner's duties
from the Sheriff's Department in
Contra Costa County were narrowly
defeated. Chapter Chairperson David
Bortin was among those arguing before
the Board of Supervisors that the
current unified department did not
permit effective investigatory functions
or safeguards of prisoners' and victims'
rights against possible abuse.
The Stiident's Education Committee
is placing posters with informational
pamphlets in ten school libraries. The
materials address students' rights, as
well as other general civil liberties
issues. Cost of the supplies and display
materials was paid for from the Harlan
Lewis Memorial Fund which was
established last year.
_ The Board continues to explore ways
of improving communications among -
Chapter members. Ideas include a
phone tree or a membership directory.
We need more input before proceeding.
Please let us know your ideas and
needs.
San Francisco
The community meeting now being
planned by the San Francisco Chapter,
to take place this June, will deal with
the subject of sex and violence in the
media. We hope to invite a panel of
experts, both psychologists and media
representatives, to discuss whether it is
necessary or even possible to control
pop portrayals of sex and violence.
In addition, the Chapter Board has
decided to support the proposal for a
San Francisco Office . of Citizens'
Complaints. A letter to that effect has
been sent by Bruce Johnston, on the
Board's behalf, to Quentin Kopp,
Chairperson of the Finance Committee
of the Board of Supervisors, who is
presently considering the police-
community accountability proposal.
Berkeley-Albany-
Kensington
In order to conform with ACLU-NC
Director elections, the Berkeley-
Albany-Kensington Board has voted to
change the time of the yearly election of
Chapter Board members. The next
election will take place in June of 1979,
rather than later this year. Parties
elected at that time shall take office in
September, 1979.
The Board has also organized a
Chapter Newsletter Committee and
asks that any Chapter members in-
terested in assisting this Committee
should contact the Chair, Ginger
Gould, at 848-7200, for further details.
It is hoped that a revitalized newsletter
will improve communication with
members, keeping them better in-
formed about the ongoing activities of
the Chapter.
The next meeting, open as usual to
any ACLU: member, is scheduled for
Thursday, May 25. It will commence at
8:00 PM, at the Friend's Meeting
House, Cedar and Walnut, in Berkeley..
Chapter
conference
a success
More than 85 enthusiastic par-
ticipants gathered together on the
weekend of April 28-29 at Greenwood
Lodge in the Santa Cruz mountains for
the ACLU's Annual Chapter-Board
Conference.
While workshops on ballot initiatives
and information regarding current
ACLU litigation and legislative work
was shared, a special session regarding
organizational priorities generated a
number of resolutions which will be
discussed by the ACLU's Board of
Directors at a special June meeting.
Among the resolutions approved by
the group in attendance was a request
that the ACLU create greater com-
munity involvement in its programs,
and for the ACLU to pay more at-
tention to equal protection and due
process issues in its future legal and
legislative action.
Twelve Chapters sent representatives
to the Conference and many affiliate
Board members joined in the weekend
program which ACLU Board Chair-
person Warren Saltzman claimed was
the `finest conference ever held since
the tradition was established five years
ago."" ACLU's Chapter Committee
_ organized the Conference. Rose Bonhag
of the Earl Warren Chapter was the
coordinator.
Marin
"The American Nazi Movement and
the First Amendment - Two Views''
will be the subject of discussion at the
Marin `County Chapter's Annual
Meeting, to be held Sunday, May 21,
3:00 PM.
Members of the ACLU and friends
are invited to attend the meeting, which
will begin with an outdoor potluck
luncheon at 1:30 PM in the garden of |
the Falkirk Community Cultural
Center, 1408 Mission Avenue, in San
Rafael.
Guest speakers will be Earl Raab,
director of the Jewish Community
Relations Council, who has written on
the subject in the Jewish Community
newspaper, and David Fishlow,
executive director of the northern
California affiliate of the ACLU. A -
question-discussion period will follow
the two talks.
The Chapter will present a scroll to
Peter Behr at the meeting, honoring
him for his stands on behalf of civil
liberties in the State Senate. In ad-
dition, members will elect new directors
to the Chapter Board during the
meeting.
_ At the April meeting of the Marin
Chapter Board, it was decided to place
a full-page ad in the Pacific Sun,
reprinting the letter, sent to ACLU
members by the national office, which
was signed by David Goldberger, the
Chicago attorney who filed the Skokie
suit. Board members personally paid
for the ad which successfully solicited
contributions to. help the national
ACLU through a period of financial
crisis.