Saturday, January 16, 2010

Quang Pham and Vietnam War Museum in OC

There is a nice article in the OC Register recently about the building of a Vietnam War Museum

Here are some of the excerpts:

"..........Quang Pham, who is running for Congress in the 47th District that includes Garden Grove, also wants to get the museum process underway. He has nabbed a web domain for the museum and plans to incorporate for non-profit status.

Pham wants a museum that will provide a complete picture of the war on behalf of all veterans and their families.

"In war," he says, "there is a tremendous fallout on human souls."

..................................For Pham, it was the war in which his father fought for South Vietnam as an Air Force lieutenant colonel. Pham's father remained in Vietnam when his family was airlifted out in 1975, and he was not able to see them again for 17 years.

"A museum would include not just the U.S. perspective," Pham explains. "The other parts were the allies and the South Vietnamese. It must include the aftermath and the reasons why the Vietnamese are in the U.S. The younger generations don't really understand about the killing fields or the re-education camps."

There is some urgency.

April 30 will mark the 35th anniversary of the fall of South Vietnam to the Communists. Passing years make it harder to document history first-hand from the veterans who fought the war, the families who lived through it, and the lives that were up-ended because of it.

U.S. military involvement, which lasted more than 14 years, claimed more than 58,000 American lives and over three million Vietnamese. Vietnam meant America was never the same.

Pham forwards the December obituary for former Marine Pilot Col. John Braddon, 80, who rescued a Vietnamese pilot who crashed while supporting U.S. Marines during the war. That pilot was Pham's father....."

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Another Lawsuit Against Madison Nguyen and the City of San Jose

So just as the city and Madison Nguyen awaiting the trial of the Brown Act violation (which by the way is rumored to be settled out of court before the trial date in Feb. 2010), there is another lawsuit in the filing.  This is a posting on the Internet:

On December 10, 2009, the City of San Jose brought a lawsuit against me and my family alleging that my building on South 10th St has some building and zoning code violation and seek to shut down my family business as well as condemn (take away) my building.

I firmly believe that, after speaking with City of San Jose officials and retracing the steps of all the Code Enforcement actions, this is a conspiracy by council member Madison Nguyen, her supporters and others to violate my constitutionally protected rights to free speech and right to petition my government for redress. The excessive and selective enforcement by the City is politically motivated and serve no Public Interest of job growth or economic revitalization for the City of San Jose and District 7 other than retaliation against me and the Vietnamese American community in San Jose as vocal critics of her style of governance.

 Ever since in office, Madison Nguyen has showed a pattern of utilizing her power as a councilmember against those whose opposed her political views and the Vietnamese American community like myself and others that seek to advance the important issues that are paramount to the economic and political progress of our proud Vietnamese American community.

Therefore, I have decided to file a Cross Complaint lawsuit against Madison Nguyen and the City of San Jose to vindicate my constitutionally protected rights. I have prepared and will pursue legal actions against other defendants that have continued to trample on my rights as a citizen of San Jose. I am looking forward to my days in court where the all the truths will ultimately be “sunshine” for everyone to determine.

It is my humble opinion that I will be judged at the end of the day by my actions of what I have done and will continue to do to improve the quality of life for our Vietnamese American community and the City of San Jose versus Madison Nguyen’s divisiveness and abusiveness that have continued to place the Vietnamese American community and the City of San Jose in harm’s way and controversy.

Thank you for your understanding and support.

Michael Luu and Family.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Lan Nguyen Violates Brown Act?

In order to clear the controversy on whether Lan Nguyen, a Garden Grove Unified School Board Trustee and the right hand man of State Assemblyman Van Tran,  a letter asking for clarification was submitted by TheLiberalOC publisher Chris Prevatt.  The letter is as follows:

Dr. Nguyen-Lam disclosed that she had witnessed conversations between three other Trustees, Lan Quoc Nguyen, Bob Harden and George West in which, prompted by Trustee Lan Quoc Nguyen, they discussed and decided their planned actions including their individual votes on matters of the nominations and election of Board officers scheduled for decision at that meeting.

Such discussions when a quorum of Trustees are present are specifically prohibited under GC § 54953. In this case, in addition to the three Trustees involved in the conversation, because the discussions were witnessed by Trustee Nguyen-Lam a total of four out of five Trustees were present when a matter was discussed and decided out of public view. Trustees Nguyen, West and Harden acknowledge at the January 5th meeting that conversations regarding the agenda item did occur, yet some stated that they did not recall the details of those discussions.

In light of these facts and under the provisions of GC § 54960.1, I request on behalf of the internet publication that the Board of Trustees take action to remedy this apparent violation of the Brown Act. I request that in the interest of public disclosure of prior Board actions that:

1. Trustees Lan Quoc Nguyen, Bob Harden and George West disclose publicly that they were all present for, and did indeed have, conversations just prior to the December 15th Board meeting in the Board Hearing Room at which time they did discuss the nominations for and election of Board officers.

2. The Board of Trustees acknowledges publicly that such conversations appear to be potential violations of the spirit, if not the letter of, the Brown Act California’s open meetings statutes.

3. The Board of Trustees affirm their commitment individually and publicly to refrain from such discussions in the future.

Please be aware that the Brown Act authorizes a court to enter a declaratory judgment against a legislative body for violating the Brown Act in the past where “there is a controversy over whether a past violation of law has occurred.” California Alliance for Utility Etc. Education v. City of San Diego, 56 Cal. App. 4th 1024, 1025, 1030, 65 Cal. Rptr. 2d 833 (1997). “[T]he ripeness doctrine does not require that to obtain declaratory relief [plaintiffs must] allege and prove a pattern or practice of past violations.” Id. at 1029 (emphasis added). Rather, a declaratory relief action is proper if plaintiffs allege that a government body has violated the law, and the body or its counsel refuse to acknowledge a violation. Common Cause v. Stirling, 147 Cal. App. 3d 518, 524, 195 Cal. Rptr. 163 (1983). The legislative body’s refusal to acknowledge a past violation is generally sufficient evidence that future violations are likely to occur. Id.

The Garden Grove Unified School District Board of Trustees has 30 days to cure or correct the alleged violations of the Brown Act before court action can be sought.