I'd bet one of the reasons that the Democrats recently scuttled this session's gun control attempts were to clear their docket so they could, instead, focus all their efforts in ramming this bill through while passions run high, in the remaining time left in the session.

The usual culprits have sponsored the bill, including (D) rep. Leslie Herod, who has supported or been involved in a number of radical Left causes, is a a social justice anti-cop activist, and gun control efforts. She was marching with the protesters recently when violence broke out.

[note: there is an embedded news report video and pics at the linked website]

=========================

State Lawmakers Introduce Bill To Make Sweeping Changes To Policing After 6 Days Of Protests

By Shaun BoydJune 2, 2020 at 11:57 pm

DENVER (CBS4) – Some state lawmakers say they hear the demands of Black Lives Matter demonstrators and are taking action. Rep. Leslie Herod and Senate President Leroy Garcia introduced a bill that overhauls policing in Colorado.

They unveiled details of the bill at a Capitol press conference Tuesday afternoon with families who’ve been impacted by police use of force.

Under a draft of the bill, the Attorney General’s Office would head-up a new unit to investigate every incident where someone is seriously injured or killed by police, release a public report of the investigation within 90 days and criminally prosecute officers who misuse force, either on-duty or off-duty, as well as those officers who witness it but don’t intervene or report it.

The bill also requires every officer in the state to wear a body camera at all times and for agencies to release videos within 7 days. It also sets up a public database for not only all use of force cases but every stop by every officer, including:

– The justification for it
– If force was used
– What happened as a result
– Whether the person had a gun
– The individual’s race, sex, age, gender identity, disability status, mental status, housing status, and veteran status

“We have a moment right now. And I want to say that all of those people who are outside protesting, demonstrating, demanding justice, your voices are being heard right here in the Capitol,” said Herod. “I need your help to make sure that we hold your elected officials, our elected officials accountable, to get this bill passed.”

The bill also outlaws chokeholds and prevents police from chasing a felon who is escaping custody unless someone’s life is in imminent danger.

Herod admits the bill’s mandates will cost agencies millions of dollars to implement and, so far, the only provision the police union supports is holding officers accountable if they don’t intervene or report misuse of force by other officers.

Shaun Boyd is CBS4's political specialist. She's a veteran reporter with more than 25 years of experience. More from Shaun Boyd


=====================


I haven't finished reading the bill yet, but what I've encountered so far is concerning.

SB20-217 Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Concerning measures to enhance law enforcement integrity.

BILL SUMMARY

The bill requires all local law enforcement agencies to issue body-worn cameras to their officers and requires all recordings of an incident be released to the public within 14 days after the incident. Peace officers shall wear and activate a body-worn camera at any time when interacting with the public.

The bill requires the division of criminal justice in the department of public safety to create an annual report of the information that is reported to the attorney general, aggregated and broken down by state or local agency that employs peace officers, along with the underlying data. Each state and local agency that employs peace officers shall report to the attorney general:

All use of force by its officers that results in death or serious bodily injury;
All instances when an officer resigned while under investigation for violating department policy;
All data relating to stops conducted by its peace officers; and
All data related to the use of an unannounced entry by a peace officer.
The division of criminal justice shall maintain a statewide database with data collected in a searchable format and publish the database on its website. Any state and local law enforcement agency that fails to meet its reporting requirements is subject to suspension of its funding by its appropriating authority.

If any peace officer is convicted of or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to any inappropriate use of physical force or a crime involving the unlawful use or threatened use of physical force, or for failing to intervene to prevent inappropriate use of physical force, the peace officer's employing agency shall immediately terminate the peace officer's employment and the P.O.S.T. board shall permanently revoke the peace officer's certification. The P.O.S.T. board shall not, under any circumstances, reinstate the peace officer's certification or grant new certification to the peace officer.

The bill allows a person who has a constitutional right secured by the bill of rights of the Colorado constitution that is infringed upon by a peace officer to bring a civil action for the violation. A plaintiff who prevails in the lawsuit is entitled to reasonable attorney fees, and a defendant in an individual suit is entitled to reasonable attorney fees for defending any frivolous claims. Qualified immunity and a defendant's good faith but erroneous belief in the lawfulness of his or her conduct are not defenses to the civil action. The bill requires a political subdivision of the state to indemnify its employees for such a claim.

The bill allows a peace officer or detention facility guard to use deadly physical force only when necessary to effect an arrest or prevent escape from custody when the person is using a deadly weapon or likely to imminently cause danger to life or serious bodily injury. The bill repeals a peace officer's authority to use a chokehold.

The bill requires the P.O.S.T. board to create and maintain a database containing information related to a peace officer's:

Untruthfulness;
Repeated failure to follow P.O.S.T. board training requirements;
Decertification; and
Termination for cause.
The bill allows the P.O.S.T. board to revoke peace officer certification for a peace officer who has failed to complete required peace officer training.

The bill requires a peace officer to have an objective justification for making a stop. After making a stop, a peace officer shall report to the peace officer's employing agency that information that the agency is required to report to the attorney general's office.

The bill requires the division of criminal justice in the department of public safety to conduct, in coordination with the P.O.S.T. board, a post-investigation evaluation of all officer-involved deaths to determine and propose improvements and alterations to training of peace officers to guide future officer behavior.

quote:

The bill also outlaws chokeholds and prevents police from chasing a felon who is escaping custody unless someone’s life is in imminent danger.

So---

A felon gets away from two officers who are trying to arrest him, he disappears, and in a few hours makes his way to a buddy's apartment to hide out for a couple of days.

And since he didn't have a gun or other weapon on him, and he was "just running off," they can't chase him.

He borrows a Glock and some extra magazines from his buddy and sets out to rob a few people and get some cash.

Three days after escaping from the police officers who weren't allowed to chase him....

He comes upon a 50-year-old woman going through an ATM drive-through. As she starts to drive off, he runs up, shoots her dead, grabs the $100 she just withdrew, and disappears.

The woman leaves behind her grieving husband, two children, and three grandchildren.

But hey, at least the police didn't run after the poor guy three days ago and violate his rights...

I was born in Denver back when it was a great city.

Fuck that place.

The indemnification provision of the bill is indicative of its origin. It is written such that it cannot be used to punish officers, only political subdivisions, ie if an officer uses excessive force, sue him but the city will pay.

Such an indemnification sets up some really perverse incentives related to the disciplining of officers. (If you fire the bad actor, he has no reason not to throw the city under the bus)

Such a provision almost guarantees it was written by the plaintiffs bar, who want both deep pockets and an endless supply of new cases to file

What did the old signs on I70 used to say? "Don't kalifornicate Colorado". Looks like its happening.

Thankfully retired Colorado LEO.
My location line below was never truer...

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:
– The individual’s race, sex, age, gender identity, disability status, mental status, housing status, and veteran status

Yeah, that's going to be an interesting field interview.

For all the common complaints about government bureaucracy and red tape, and how slow it so often moves when providing service to the public, Democrat legislators sure seem to know how to ram bills through at the speed of light.

SB20-217 Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity bill was introduced on 3 June, and as of 8 June several amendments have been made to the original bill and it has passed its second reading and is set to be heard today in front of the full Senate, where it is expected to pass. The General Assembly is scheduled to adjourn at the end of the week so it is apparent that this bill is one the Democrats have prioritized in ramming through to passage before the deadline.

My belief is that any bill dealing with a subject supposedly important enough to pass should be done in a measured way, discussed and debated and moved slow enough for the public to have time to discuss and consider and offer input on. The speed of the bills Democrats are ramming through the legislature right now simply don't allow enough time to read through and debate, let alone actually track what their status is or plan for public comment periods.

For those unable to attend the hearings or testify in person, my suggestion is to use the link I posted previously to make public comments that will be allowed into the public record for this session.

I haven't had time to read any of the amendments so I'm relying on news sources for coverage, which is haphazard at best. My non-LEO perception is that there are still concerning aspects to this bill, but I would be interested to hear LEO perceptions of the bill.

[Note: my usual practice is to include the actual text of the articles I post, however the last article I attempted to post flagged for a reference to a banned topic and used forum trigger words, and this article makes some mention of these things as well, so I'll just post a link to the article. Multiple hyperlinks can be found at the linked website article].

Colorado police reform bill poised to pass Senate after garnering Republican support after changes

Quote from the linked article:

Even law enforcement groups in Colorado had mostly acquiesced to the bill after Monday’s amendments. In a joint statement from the County Sheriffs of Colorado, the Colorado Fraternal Order of Police and the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police, the groups said they still had some concerns but appreciated the changes.

There are simply too many bills and too little time to read through and track them all before the General Assembly adjourns at the end of the week.

The best I can offer is today's Senate Third Reading of bills, which will hopefully serve as an indicator of which bills are closest to being rammed through to passage before the deadline.

HB20-1383 Reduce The General Fund Reserve


SCR20-001 Repeal Property Tax Assessment Rates


SB20-212 Reimbursement For Telehealth Services


SB20-205 Sick Leave For Employees


SB20-217 Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity


SB20-215 Health Insurance Affordability Enterprise

As expected, SB20-217 Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity bill passed through the Senate and is headed to the House.

I came across this article on the bill in which DA George Brauchler reviews both some of the good as well as the bad parts of the bill that he would like to see fixed.

[note: hyperlinks found at linked opinion piece]

====================

DA Brauchler: Rushed police accountability bill not all bad, problem parts need fixing

June 8, 2020 By Scott Weiser

DENVER–The sweeping “Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity” bill, Senate Bill 20-217, is moving through the state legislature at a rapid clip. It was introduced on June 3, amended and passed June 4 by the Senate State, Military and Veterans Affairs committee, passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee June 6 and is currently scheduled to be heard on the Senate floor Tuesday, June 9.

In a Friday radio interview with 630 KHOW host Ross Kaminsky, 18th Judicial District Attorney George Brauchler said that while there are “some good and important parts of this bill,” there are also serious problems in a bill being rushed through the process that he would like to see addressed. “It’s not that this this bill is all bad, I would love for them to fix the things that need to be fixed so that I can come out and say yes,” said Brauchler, adding that “I think you’d find that all 22 DAs would come out and say yes, we want to support this.”

The bill requires, among other things, that all local law enforcement officers wear body cameras that must be activated “at any time when interacting with the public.” It requires detailed reporting by local law enforcement on:

All use of force by its officers that results in death or serious bodily injury;

All instances when an officer resigned while under investigation for violating department policy;

All data relating to stops conducted by its peace officers; and

All data related to the use of an unannounced entry by a peace officer.

A searchable database of this information must be created by the state division of criminal justice and be available to the public.

It requires that any local law enforcement officer who is “convicted of or pleads guilty or nolo contendere to any inappropriate use of physical force or a crime involving the unlawful use or threatened use of physical force, or for failing to intervene to prevent inappropriate use of physical force” be fired and have their state peace officer certification permanently revoked.

“I’m a big fan of what this bill does when it tries to create a central by database for cops who are liars. We don’t have that right now,” Brauchler told Kaminsky. “This is why these guys end up bouncing around to other jurisdictions within the state and seem to get on the job again. That isn’t good for anybody. I want there to be a centralized database. This thing does that, so I appreciate it.”

The bill also removes qualified immunity from local law enforcement officers, which includes district attorneys and their deputies, sheriff’s and their deputies, jail guards and all city police officers or town marshals. It also creates a state civil cause of action for persons claiming they were deprived of their rights.

But it doesn’t remove qualified immunity from state law enforcement officers including the Colorado State Patrol, the Attorney General or state university police departments like the University of Colorado.

“This is another thing that I find incredibly hypocritical and and really disrespectful of the idea that this is based on principle not politics. They take qualified immunity away, they take away the good faith defense for law enforcement, but not across the board,” Brauchler said. “In order to avoid a crippling fiscal note because they’re in the hole 3.2 billion bucks, they exempt state law enforcement. Doesn’t apply to the AG’s office. Doesn’t apply to State Patrol. Doesn’t apply to prison guards. It only applies to local prosecutors and local law enforcement.”

Qualified immunity is a legal principle created by the U.S. Supreme Court saying that law enforcement officers are immune from being held personally liable for their actions unless they knew, or reasonably should have known that what they were doing was unlawful.

Ordinarily police officers are covered by liability insurance held by their agency to pay for civil judgments even if they are found guilty of a violation of someone’s civil rights. This protects taxpayers from either losing public safety services or having to backfill public safety budgets for civil lawsuit settlements.

The bill expressly removes the liability coverage for the first $100,000 or 5% of the judgment for the officer if the officer does not have “a subjective good-faith basis that the officer’s actions were lawful and that it was objectively reasonable for the peace officer to have that belief.” That part would come directly out of the officer’s pocket.

It also requires that the first $200,000 of any judgment covered by the agency’s liability insurance come first out of the “political subdivisions public safety budget,” or if the budget is less than $200,000, at least 25% of the public safety budget must be appropriated towards the settlement before liability coverage would kick in.

“Not only did this bill do away with qualified immunity, at the time I testified on it yesterday it did away with any potential defense by a law enforcement officer related to a good faith mistake of fact,” Brauchler said. “They could have believed that they were doing something lawful. They could have been following even a warrant signed by a judge that ultimately is determined to be invalid and they would have been personally liable.”

Brauchler says that the sanctions are so punitive that he is afraid that many qualified law enforcement professionals will quit and find other work due to the unprecedented uninsurable liability for even good-faith mistakes.

“I’ve got people in my office, fantastic prosecutors, the kind you would want on your neighbor’s case if your neighbor was victimized by someone,” Brauchler said. “They’re saying, ‘I don’t know how much longer I can do this.’ These are moms with small kids, dads, families. I’ve got senior members of law enforcement who I think are the bomb reaching out to me and saying, ‘My troops are beside themselves, guys talking about early retirement.’ Not bad cops, good cops.”

Brauchler also fears that this bill, which he said was written by the ACLU, will compromise the ability of departments to attract new police officers.

“They are going to continue the downward spiral which we’re already on of quality recruits seeking to make law enforcement a career.”

[note: hyperlink and comments can be found at linked website]

==================

‘TABOR-busting’ tax bill rushed through in last days of legislature

June 18, 2020

By Scott Weiser

DENVER–In the waning hours of the long-delayed Colorado legislative session, majority House and Senate Democrats pushed through a partisan tax bill that Senator Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, called “TABOR-busting.”

Sonnenberg told Complete Colorado Wednesday that House Bill 20-1420, is “more like a stick of dynamite under the entire house of TABOR, completely blowing it off of its foundation.”

Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR, requires among other things that voters must approve new taxes or any tax policy change “directly causing a net tax revenue gain.”

Senator Ray Scott, R-Grand Junction agreed.

“It was abundantly clear that the Democrats were not going to stop until they figured out how they were going to tax somebody for something,” Scott told Complete Colorado.

“Democrats came up with as many ways as they possibly could to try to back-fill [a $2.5 billion budget deficit] and to continue to fund their pet programs,” Scott said. “Hence these types of bills came at the last minute when there was just a couple or three days left, and they got jammed through because they can.”

The bill, introduced in the House June 8, was rushed through the legislative process at a remarkable clip; being heard by two committees, amended, and passed out of the House by the 11th. A further amended version then passed out of the the Senate on the 15th, with the House considering, concurring and re-passing the bill on the same day, just prior to the end of the legislative session.

Titled the “Tax Fairness Act” (TFA), the bill wipes out some of the Colorado tax benefits of President Trump’s Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) by requiring taxpayers to add back to their federal taxable income various deductions available under CARES when calculating their state taxable income.

Colorado’s flat 4.63% state income tax rate is based on the taxpayer’s federal adjusted gross income (AGI) with certain state adjustments.

The bill specifically requires taxpayers with an AGI of more than $500,000 for individuals and $1 million for joint filers to add back to their federal AGI “an amount equal to the deduction for qualified business income” when calculating their state taxes.

It also permanently increases Colorado’s earned income tax (EIT) credit from 10% to 15% of taxes owed beginning in 2022 and allows taxpayers who are not currently eligible for the EIT because they, their spouses or dependents “do not have a social security number that is valid for employment” to claim the EIT.

“Quite honestly the earned income tax credit is nothing more than a redistribution of wealth where they give tax dollars to people that that don’t make enough to actually pay income tax,” Sonnenberg said.

The upshot of the changes to state tax law is an increase in net state tax revenues of $94 million in fiscal year 2020-21 and $32 million in fiscal year 2021-22, according to the Legislative Council’s fiscal note accompanying the bill.

Which is why Sonnenberg and Scott say it flatly violates the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights and will almost certainly be challenged in the state Supreme Court.

“As you know, TABOR requires that we go to the people to ask permission to raise taxes,” said Scott. “I think it does violate TABOR and I think that’s going to be the big fight in court, explaining the tax increase without going to the people. Love it or hate it, that’s what TABOR is.”

Sonnenberg agrees.

“Oh absolutely, TABOR is very clear. You cannot make a policy change that increases taxes without going to a vote of the people. When you remove a tax credit, especially one that’s been in place, or a tax incentive that has been in place, and it results in an increase in taxes, that is a TABOR issue.”

The Colorado Springs Gazette editorial board agrees as well, calling HB 1420 a “blatant violation” of TABOR. “The legislature and governor cannot eliminate tax exemptions — for the express purpose of growing tax revenues — without enacting a ‘tax policy change.’ To obey the law, they need to ask voters,” said the Gazette in a June 16 editorial urging Governor Polis to veto the bill.

But Sonnenberg isn’t convinced that the Colorado Supreme Court will rule according what the law says.

“The Governor knew it was a violation of TABOR, he knew it was bad for business. He said two weeks ago ‘I see no path forward for 1420 becoming law,’ and now all of a sudden it looks like he may sign it,” Sonnenberg said. “I hope that we are able to muster up enough money to put a legal challenge in front of the Supreme Court, although you know as well as I do the Supreme Court is made up of judges that have been appointed mostly by Democratic governors. We saw how they ruled on the Constitution with regard to a 120-day legislative session [during the Coronavirus pandemic]. I’m not sure I have much faith in the Colorado Supreme Court, but that’s where we’re going to have to have the battle now.”

Governor Polis has three options: he can sign the bill, veto it, or allow it to pass into law without his signature.

Attempts to reach the House sponsors of the bill for comment were unsuccessful as of press time.

State employees now have right to collectively bargain

By Jon Pompia

Posted Jun 17, 2020 at 12:37 PM

With Gov. Jarid Polis’ signing into law the Colorado Partnership for Quality Jobs and Services Act, state employees now have the right collectively bargain on matters of pay, benefits, and conditions and terms of employment.

House Bill 20-1153, signed by Polis on Tuesday, was sponsored by Rep. Daneya Esgar, D-Pueblo, and cosponsored by the entire House Democratic Caucus, led by Senate President Leroy Garcia, D-Pueblo, and Sen. Brittany Pettersen.

Esgar said passage of the bill was a top priority in the 2020 legislative session.

“State employees have been at the forefront of our state’s fight against COVID-19,” she said. “In addition to their crucial public health work, these public servants care for our veterans, keep our prisons safe, plow our roads in winter storms and protect our air and water.

“Thanks to their tireless work, advocacy and dedication, state workers will soon be able to negotiate for the pay, benefits and working conditions they deserve.”

The bill was written in hopes of fostering new partnerships between frontline workers and the state that will lead to innovation and better state services. Furthermore, by helping to fill the nearly one in five vacant state positions, the measure aims to ensure that Colorado has the experienced and talented workforce needed to serve state residents.

“This legislation is critical to retaining and recruiting the state workforce Coloradans need and deserve,” Esgar said. “Stagnant wages have led to increased turnover and state employees working multiple jobs, which negatively impacts the delivery of state services.”

The Colorado Partnership for Quality Jobs and Services Act does not permit state employees to strike: similar to collective bargaining laws for state employees in the states with those laws. The Colorado law does require the state to participate in good faith in the formalized partnership process, with all determinations regarding wage and benefit issues reached through the partnership process to be included in the governor’s budget and approved by the Joint Budget Committee and General Assembly.

According to a statement from the Colorado House Democrats, “For more than a decade, WINS, the state’s public employee union, has represented state employees who have been united in their desire to be part of an organization that fights to improve their lives.

“Membership in the union is completely voluntary, but it’s clear that state employees overwhelmingly support union membership in WINS.”

Senate President Garcia said that long before the pandemic, “Many of our state employees were overworked and under-compensated. But now, as we face unprecedented unemployment and an increasing need for public services, state workers are bearing an even bigger burden.

“This law will support those who keep Colorado running everyday and provide them a platform to have their voices heard. I am incredibly proud to be a part of such transformational legislation, and I look forward to seeing the impact it will have on our communities.”

Secretary of State Jena Griswold praised the new law, as it will “ensure that state employees will have a seat at the table to advocate for their needs and protect their livelihoods. All working people deserve a livable wage, access to health care, and safe working conditions.

“I congratulate the state employees whose tireless work and advocacy have led to this moment: Gov. Polis for signing this into law, and Sen. Garcia, Sen. Pettersen and Rep. Esgar, who led the charge in the legislature.”

Chieftain reporter Jon Pompia can be reached by email at jpompia@chieftain.com or at twitter.com/jpompia. Help support local journalism by subscribing to the Chieftain at chieftain.com/subscribenow

My liberal in-laws argued that the efforts last year for the state to keep a portion of what would be an individual's full tax refund is somehow not a tax increase.

I of course said any time you are paying more taxes in aggregate than you would under the current conditions, that is a tax increase (and therefore a TABOR issue).

Still not sure if they were being dishonest, or just don't get it. The ends justifies the means is my best guess.

Passing the State worker collective bargaining is very important to establishing a loyal Democrat voting block into perpetuity. Union dues go into the Democrats election coffers who then pass pro state worker protections, it is an important cycle to establish. Colorado can expect less effective state workers and more of them at higher costs. Very Sad.

HK Ag

^^ Colorado can also expect a devolution to a technocracy that comes complete with its own taxpayer-funded lobbying arm, if California's experience is anything to go by.

Sad to see. Don’t think the changing of the political fray will reverse it either.

Growing up I understood to work with/for the State, the pay was less but the benefits were top notch. If the state workers get to live under union rules, get excellent at and have top notch benefits, well shit, I’m quitting my private industry job and going to work for the state. More pay for less work. What a deal.

Screw the tax payers. I deserve it......

Born in Colorado, but I imagine I'll be leaving in the next few years. I'm ashamed at what this state represents now. I don't see how to ever reverse this trend towards socialism. Sad, it has been a mostly beautiful place to live, until the last few years.

^^^Ditto.
The house is listed, we're looking at Oklahoma.

quote:

Originally posted by john1:
^^^Ditto.
The house is listed, we're looking at Oklahoma.

We lived their in the late 80's. The house I owned was completely scraped off by a tornado. Just make sure you have adequate storm protection. Most all her family have passed down there now. So I doubt we'll go back. It's not a bad place. The wind gets a bit old.... Great for gun ownership though.

The 2019 Recall effort against Gov. Polis ultimately failed, however a new 2020 recall effort is underway.

The 2020 group approached the previous recall groups about participating but they declined to do so, so this group is going it alone. This recall effort will be a two question one, with the first question being should Governor Polis be recalled, and the second question is who shall replace him. Gov. Polis isn't due for re-election until 2022, however there are currently 2 candidates declared to run against him, so both of these candidates would be options. The two currently declared candidates are Laurie Clark and Greg Lopez. I don't know anything about Clark, but Greg Lopez is a solid Republican who has run for Governor previously. It is likely that, should the recall be successful, other candidates would declare. The effort requires 632,000 signatures to move forward, so they have set a goal of 1 million signatures, to allow for signatures that will be dismissed as invalid. If the petition is successful a special election would be called 30-60 days later, which really isn't great timing, coming right after a contentious election, moving into the cold icy Winter months, and into the Thanksgiving and Christmas season...but, it is what it is, and it would require voters to make an extra effort to vote again.

Reportedly, there are even more signatures than the last effort and they are currently @ %55 of their goal. Their goal is to have the necessary number of signatures by November 2 (next Monday, day before the national election), to allow time for the signatures to be counted and verified before being submitted to the Secretary of State. Technically, they can stretch that date a little, but not much more. Then there would be a period for the SoS to verify the signatures, followed by a period to allow for a protest process against the signatures.

Note that there is only one official website, however the previous recall groups left their websites up. Also, there has been a false website set up attempting to collect both signatures and donations, and it appears the opposition has been trying to create some "false flag" sites to counter the effort.

SIGNATURES MUST BE MADE IN PERSON, ON PAPER, NOT ONLINE, AND THIS GROUP IS NOT TRYING TO COLLECT MONETARY DONATIONS (however, I'm guessing they wouldn't turn down a donation if made in person.) They are mostly interested in getting volunteers to help with the petition drives.

Some petition signing sites are only manned on certain days/ hours, and other sites are dedicated sites at local businesses. A full list of signing sites can be found at their website.

If you know any like-minded people or business owners who would be willing to sign the petition please feel free to spread the word.

The only official 2020 recall website:

https://www.dethronepolis.com/

^^^ Thanks for the link MDS. I was able to trudge through the mud today after all the snowmelt, and add my name to list.