Photo: Shine

16 Feb 2017

Attachment to complaint, Bibb County School District

IERB:

Please find attached a copy of the response to an open records request I received on today’s date from Bibb County School District and the admission that there is a violation of OCGA 50-36-1 on administering Public Benefits.  In this case, Adult Education.

Here is part of relevant language of OCGA 50-36-1:
f) (1) Except as provided in subsection (g) of this Code section, an agency or political subdivision providing or administering a public benefit shall require every applicant for such benefit to:

(A) Provide at least one secure and verifiable document, as defined in Code Section 50-36-2, or a copy or facsimile of such document. Any document required by this subparagraph may be submitted by or on behalf of the applicant at any time within nine months prior to the date of application so long as the document remains valid through the licensing or approval period or such other period for which the applicant is applying to receive a public benefit; and

(B) Execute a signed and sworn affidavit verifying the applicant’s lawful presence in the United States under federal immigration law; provided, however, that if the applicant is younger than 18 years of age at the time of the application, he or she shall execute the affidavit required by this subparagraph within 30 days after his or her eighteenth birthday. Such affidavit shall affirm that:

(i) The applicant is a United States citizen or legal permanent resident 18 years of age or older; or

(ii) The applicant is a qualified alien or nonimmigrant under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 U.S.C., 18 years of age or older lawfully present in the United States and provide the applicant’s alien number issued by the Department of Homeland Security or other federal immigration agency.

(2) The state auditor shall create affidavits for use under this subsection and shall keep a current version of such affidavits on the Department of Audits and Accounts’ official website.

Here is my request sent to Bibb County (also HERE):

6 February 2017

Director of Communications Stephanie Hartley
Bibb County School District
484 Mulberry Street Macon, GA 31201
(478) 765-8711
Stephanie.Hartley@bcsdk12.net

OPEN RECORDS REQUEST

Re; Compliance with OCGA 50-36-1

Ms. Hartley,
Please regard this letter as my official request for public records under Georgia’s open records law.

According to information included in this news story from the Macon Telegraph, Bibb County Schools is administering Adult Education classes. Adult education is a public benefit under state law and is reserved for eligible recipients. The administration requirements for agencies that administer these public benefits are clear under OCGA 50-36-1.

I am familiar with the 1982 Plyler v Doe SCOTUS decision that mandates K-12 education regardless of immigration status and with the purpose of Title lll grants and their use for enrolled students and permitted project guidelines. I am also familiar with regulations that require compliance with state and local law in administration of these grants.

For the time period 1 July 2014 to 31 December 2016, Please send me copies of the following documents, which are required to be collected from applicants for public benefits. I understand that some of the information contained in these documents may be redacted.

1) Standardized, notarized affidavit from applicants for adult students for ESOL classes.
2 ) Secure and Verifiable ID offered to verify eligibility for Public Benefits.
3 ) Any documents that illustrate the original start date of the Bibb Schools Adult education classes described in the above mentioned news report.
4 ) Any document that will illustrate the total number of adults served in this program to 31 December 2016.
Please contact me with any questions.
Respectfully submitted,
D.A. King
Marietta, Ga. 30066
__
Update: First reply:
10:32 AM 6 Feb
Good morning,
Your Open Records Request is being shared here with our Chief Legal Counsel, Mr. Randy Howard. He will provide you with an update in response to your request. His email, should you have further questions or concerns, is randy.howard@bcsdk12.net.
Thank you,
Stephanie
STEPHANIE HARTLEY
Director of Communications
Bibb County School District
www.bcsdk12.net
O: 478-765-8620
C: 478-952-1753
@bibbschools

The second reply (Feb. 16) is attached on a separate page here.
D.A. King

Attachment to complaint                    #5                                                                              30 January 2017

Immigration Enforcement Review Board
Complaint against
Marietta City Schools Superintendent /Dr. Grant Rivera
and
Marietta City Schools / board members
Alan Levine, Jason Waters, Randy Weiner, Allison Gruehn, Jeriene Grimes, Irene Berens

Re; OCGA 13-10-91 and OCGA 50-36-1

Please regard this as my official complaint and request for action.

To protect jobs for eligible workers, state law put in place in 2006 requires all public employers to verify that all of their contractors sign a notarized affidavit swearing that the contractor is using the federal E-Verify system. The “Contractor Affidavit and Agreement” is standardized by law to avoid confusion and the official model affidavit form is posted on the official website of the office of the Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts.

On the affidavit, the contractor – paid with tax dollars – is required to enter their unique federal E-Verify user number and date of authorization to use E-Verify from the USCIS so that there is a reduced chance of falsely claiming E-Verify user authority to obtain public contract work.

Violations:
*The contractor affidavit contained in a public records response to me on another matter clearly shows that there is no entry for the E-Verify user number.

*The affidavit has no entry for the date of E-Verify user authorization.

*The affidavit has been illegally presented and accepted without the required notarization.

*Marietta schools illegally accepted the improper contractor affidavit and then at a cost to city taxpayers of $10,000, illegally hired LaAmistad Inc. to conduct Adult education classes on public property for Marietta Schools. I note that this is also a violation of OCGA 50-36-1, as Adult Education is a public benefit under state law and that law is clear on documents to verify eligibility of recipients of public benefits. Marietta Schools cannot produce these documents. If needed, I will file separate complaint on that violation.

*Marietta Schools is using an illegal affidavit, as the form they are using is not the official model.

* Marietta Schools is administering public benefits in violation of two stat elaws. I request the IERB use its power to reveal the number total violations and the exact start date.

I respectfully note that according to the Marietta City Schools website, “BOARD OF EDUCATION DUTIES Enact policies that guide the operation of the system; Adopt programs of study and evaluate program effectiveness.” It’s the first one listed.

Below, I attach a small section of OCGA 13-10-91. Please see also OCGA 50-36-1.

OCGA 13-10-91 “(9) Any person who knowingly and willfully makes a false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement in an affidavit submitted pursuant to this subsection shall be guilty of a violation of Code Section 16-10-20 and, upon conviction, shall be punished as provided in such Code section. Contractors, subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, and any person convicted for false statements based on a violation of this subsection shall be prohibited from bidding on or entering into any public contract for 12 months following such conviction. A contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor that has been found by the Commissioner to have violated this subsection shall be listed by the Department of Labor on www.open.georgia.gov or other official website of the state with public information regarding such violation, including the identity of the violator, the nature of the contract, and the date of conviction. A public employee, contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor shall not be held civilly liable or criminally responsible for unknowingly or unintentionally accepting a bid from or contracting with a contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor acting in violation of this subsection. Any contractor, subcontractor, or sub-subcontractor found by the Commissioner to have violated this subsection shall, on a second or subsequent violations, be prohibited from bidding on or entering into any public contract for 12 months following the date of such finding.”

Respectfully submitted,

D.A. King

Marietta, Ga. 30066

IERB Jan 2017 #2 Attachment to official complaint,

17 January, 2017 #2

Violation (s) of OCGA 50-36-1
DeKalb County School District/Cross Keys High School et al

Under Georgia law Public Benefits may only be administered to eligible applicants.

OCGA 50-36-1
“(f) (1) Except as provided in subsection (g) of this Code section, an agency or political subdivision providing or administering a public benefit shall require every applicant for such benefit to:

(A) Provide at least one secure and verifiable document, as defined in Code Section 50-36-2, or a copy or facsimile of such document. Any document required by this subparagraph may be submitted by or on behalf of the applicant at any time within nine months prior to the date of application so long as the document remains valid through the licensing or approval period or such other period for which the applicant is applying to receive a public benefit; and

(B) Execute a signed and sworn affidavit verifying the applicant’s lawful presence in the United States under federal immigration law; provided, however, that if the applicant is younger than 18 years of age at the time of the application, he or she shall execute the affidavit required by this subparagraph within 30 days after his or her eighteenth birthday. Such affidavit shall affirm that:

(i) The applicant is a United States citizen or legal permanent resident 18 years of age or older; or

(ii) The applicant is a qualified alien or nonimmigrant under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 U.S.C., 18 years of age or older lawfully present in the United States and provide the applicant’s alien number issued by the Department of Homeland Security or other federal immigration agency.

(2) The state auditor shall create affidavits for use under this subsection and shall keep a current version of such affidavits on the Department of Audits and Accounts’ official website.”

Adult education is listed in the law as a Public Benefit in Georgia law.

According to various news reports, including one HERE, Cross Keys High School has in place an ongoing program of adult education for parents of students. Apparently, this program is at least two years old.

I filed an open records request in December, 2016 seeking the required affidavits and Secure ID documents that should be offered and collected from applicants for these adult education classes. It can be seen HERE, along with a response saying it would take 10 days to complete ( HERE ). I have not received the required documents and I submit the reason is that they do not exist.

In my educated opinion, the Cross Keys High School/DeKalb Schools is/are in violation of state law regulated by the IERB and separately and additionally by the Georgia Attorney General. Again.

Please begin the process of investigation and enforcement.

D.A. King
Marietta
I am a registered voter

IERB Jan 2017 #1 Attachment to official complaint

17 January, 2017 #1

Violation (s) of OCGA 50-36-1
City of Atlanta

Under Georgia law Public Benefits may only be administered to eligible applicants.

OCGA 50-36-1
“(f) (1) Except as provided in subsection (g) of this Code section, an agency or political subdivision providing or administering a public benefit shall require every applicant for such benefit to:

(A) Provide at least one secure and verifiable document, as defined in Code Section 50-36-2, or a copy or facsimile of such document. Any document required by this subparagraph may be submitted by or on behalf of the applicant at any time within nine months prior to the date of application so long as the document remains valid through the licensing or approval period or such other period for which the applicant is applying to receive a public benefit; and

(B) Execute a signed and sworn affidavit verifying the applicant’s lawful presence in the United States under federal immigration law; provided, however, that if the applicant is younger than 18 years of age at the time of the application, he or she shall execute the affidavit required by this subparagraph within 30 days after his or her eighteenth birthday. Such affidavit shall affirm that:

(i) The applicant is a United States citizen or legal permanent resident 18 years of age or older; or

(ii) The applicant is a qualified alien or nonimmigrant under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 U.S.C., 18 years of age or older lawfully present in the United States and provide the applicant’s alien number issued by the Department of Homeland Security or other federal immigration agency.

(2) The state auditor shall create affidavits for use under this subsection and shall keep a current version of such affidavits on the Department of Audits and Accounts’ official website.”

Adult education is listed in the law as a Public Benefit in Georgia law.

According to at least one news report – complete with photos – which can be seen and printed out HERE from the AJC, the City of Atlanta has in place an ongoing adult education classes/program aimed at immigrants. In addition, the City of Atlanta advertises its “MyCity Academy Atlanta” education program HERE. The application for these taxpayer services provided as adult education can be viewed HERE. There is no provision for verifying eligibility. There is no system that I can find in place to follow the law on these adult education classes.

Note: Having been through the process of trying to obtain public documents such as affidavits and Secure ID records from the City of Atlanta using Georgia’s open records law, I leave it to the IERB to ask that any existing affidavits and copies of secure ID be disclosed.

In my educated opinion, the City of Atlanta is in violation of state law regulated by the IERB and separately and additionally by the Georgia Attorney General. Again.

Please begin the process of investigation and enforcement.

D.A. King
Marietta
I am a registered voter

Sent to Creative Loafing, December 5, 2016

Re; “State board that hears immigration complaints rules against Atlanta”
Atlanta could face potential fines, sanctions related to vocal immigration critic’s complaint

Regina Willis, December 1, 2016

Dear editors,

I was pleasantly surprised to read your balanced coverage of my complaints against the City of Atlanta to the Immigration Enforcement Review Board regarding clear violations of state law on safeguarding public benefits. Thank you for covering what the AJC, WSB and literally all of the other Atlanta news outlets have pointedly ignored.

Allow me to clarify and correct a few details.

Your report tells readers that the respected Washington DC group ‘Pro-English’ is “anti-immigration.” This is demonstrably false. Because I have been a pro-enforcement immigration activist for more than a decade, I know that Pro-English is exactly that…pro-English. They advance the commonsense concept that national unity can be greatly increased with English as our common and official language.

I urge you and your readers to take a look at the “About” page of the Pro-English website.

Your report says, “under Georgia’s immigration law, cities are supposed to verify that business licenses are only given to citizens or residents who are “lawfully present” in the United States. For-profit businesses must submit the necessary documents every year, but nonprofits need only do so the first time they apply.”

This is not even close. State law does not create any special treatment for non-profit businesses in any part of the code aimed at screening applicants for new or renewal business licenses. I urge you and interested readers to see OCGA 50-36-1. Mayor Reed’s administration has attempted to use a “loophole” that does not exist in reality.

Regarding Georgia’s 2011 “Illegal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Act” (H.B. 87), your report has it wrong when you tell readers “several sections of the law were eventually overturned by the courts…” While a federal judge initially put a stay on two sections (Sections 7 & 8) of the twenty-three-section legislation, an appeals court later upheld Section 8. The fact is that only one section was “overturned.”

It should be noted that I have also filed similar valid complaints with the state Attorney General, who has full responsibility to prosecute Mayor Reed and his administrators for the violations of Georgia law designed to protect us all from illegal immigration. No matter what the IERB does or does not do.

I have not received any notification from the AG that makes me believe these complaints are being processed.

Maybe your readers will see a “part two” to your coverage?

D.A. King
Marietta
President, The Dustin Inman Society

Creative Loafing

State board that hears immigration complaints rules against Atlanta

Atlanta could face potential fines, sanctions related to vocal immigration critic’s complaint

REGINA WILLIS DEC. 1, 2016

Atlanta could face potential fines, sanctions related to vocal immigration critic’s complaintThe City of Atlanta could soon have a lot of paperwork on its hands thanks to a recent ruling by an obscure state panel that makes sure Georgia governments and agencies comply with the state’s immigration laws.

The Immigrant Enforcement Review Board, or IERB, is tasked with investigating and sanctioning government agencies, from state departments to local municipalities, for violating any of three laws passed as part of

House Bill 87, Georgia’s comprehensive and controversial immigration legislation which lawmakers approved in 2011.

The seven-person board holds meetings, can subpoena documents and witnesses, and is composed of political appointees, including a one-time lobbyist for anti-immigration group ProEnglish. In May 2014, the IERB threatened to fine DeKalb County $5,000 for not using an online program that checks immigration status for a summer program.

Under Georgia’s immigration law, cities are supposed to verify that business licenses are only given to citizens or residents who are “lawfully present” in the United States. For-profit businesses must submit the necessary documents every year, but nonprofits need only do so the first time they apply. Atlanta has never gone back to groups that applied with the city before the law went into effect in 2011 to obtain the relevant documents.

Angela Hinton, the city’s chief counsel,argued Atlanta’s case before the board at the Gold Dome on Nov. 10. She said nonprofits do not apply for their business license annually, so “there’s not an application. There’s not a requirement to resubmit yourself to the government.”

Without an application, Hinton argued, Atlanta has no legal reason to request the citizenship verification documents from a nonprofit applicant. New nonprofits would have to submit SAVE, eVerify, and secure and verifiable ID — the documents required to prove citizenship or immigration status — but older nonprofits have never gone through this process, Hinton said.

The board, however, disagreed with the city’s interpretation of the law. The crux of the debate is how city codes should be interpreted under state law and when a nonprofit is an “applicant for a public benefit.”

“What I see happening is, if we can redefine the word ‘application’ and thereby ‘applicant,’ that pretty much any entity in this state can somehow get out of compliance with a law whose intention was simply to protect taxpayer dollars and ensure that Georgia is not a comfortable place for people who are here illegally,” D.A. King, who filed the complaint, told the board on Nov. 10. His argument received vocal support from several members.

King leads the Dustin Inman Society, one of Georgia’s most vocal advocates for stronger immigration laws. He told Creative Loafing by email, “My hope is that the IERB will use all of its power to send a message to the other officials who are allowed to scoff at the law. Best case? Mayor Reed takes a heavy personal fine as the final authority in charge of what are admitted violations.”

King has filed seven of the eight complaints the board has received since it was created, including one against more than 1,200 local governments and agencies in Georgia, extending from the Abbeville Housing Authority to the City of Young Harris. The board did not take up that complaint, instead asking King to narrow down his complaint to one or two municipalities.

King was one of the key advocates for the passage of HB 87 and has faced criticism from organizations, including the Anti-Defamation League, for his role in Georgia’s immigration debate and the language he’s used. The ADL in 2014 said “King has demonized immigrants through his bigoted statements” but “he continues to be a major player in the immigration debate in Georgia.”

“In the limited bubble-world of totalitarian progressives, borders, immigration laws, and advocates for an equal application of the law are attacked with the liberal goop of racism,” King said in response to critics. “Thanks to years of this race-baiting and these baseless attacks, the American people woke up, took a stand, and elected Donald Trump president.”

Modeled after Arizona’s controversial measure and sponsored by state Rep. Matt Ramsey, R-Peachtree City, Georgia’s immigration law allowed police officers to question some people about their immigration status and set fines for people who assist undocumented immigrants, among other provisions.

Several sections of the law were eventually overturned by the courts, but the IERB, a late addition to the legislation that dominated the 2011 legislative session, and the rules they enforce, stuck around. Chuck Kuck, an Atlanta immigration lawyer and former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association who vocally opposed HB 87, says the IERB is “the only part of [the law] that’s really functioned at all.”

The IERB will send the city a letter with its official ruling, and Atlanta officials might be looking at updating quite a bit of paperwork if they want to avoid potential sanctions. According to IERB Chair Ben Vinson, the city has 30 days to appeal or “alter their process to avoid any consequence.” The IERB would hear the appeal. If it disagrees and continues as usual, a sanction hearing would be held. A Reed spokeswoman said the city had not been served with a written decision from the board. “Once we receive a decision, we will consider all options and make a determination at that time,” she said.

NOTE: After this story went to press, Vinson sent the city a letter asking it to take “remedial action” and that includes “obtaining SAVE documentation from those nonprofit entities originally licensed” after the 2011 immigration law took effect. It’s also asking the city to provide information about the “total number of nonprofits” that might be included in that group so the IERB “might further consider all ramifications and remedial actions.”  HERE

On Nov 9, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Regina Willis wrote:

Hello D.A. King,

I am a freelance reporter doing a story for Creative Loafing on the immigrant enforcement review board, stemming from your most recent complaint filed with the board against the City of Atlanta. Let me know if you’d be available to discuss this complaint, as well as your previous complaints with the board and your work on HB 87 creating this board.

Thanks so much, and I look forward to speaking with you at your earliest convenience.

Regards,
Regina

—
Regina Willis
Freelance Reporter
e: RWillisD@gmail.com

__

On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 11:36 AM, D.A. King wrote:
FYI
Your editors do not have the professional courtesy to return queries about sending in response letters and columns as balance to the anti enforcement goop that shows up in your paper. That was not always the case.
But, I will send you replies to an email interview questions.

dak
__

On Wed, Mov 9, 2016 at 11:48 AM, D.A. King wrote
Regina Willis , sharry.smith@creativeloafing.com, Phil Kent , Tim Bryant

I just read Your Better Georgia “journalism” on ” Georgia Racists/Dax Lopez…” The fact that Creative Loafing has dipped so far into the barrel for free lance is not that surprising. You have no honor and you are not a journalist. But I will still reply to email questions.
dak
__

Hello,

Thanks for agreeing to answer some questions. I’m interested in:

(1) Your work with the IERB. Do you know how many complaints you have filed? What source(s) inform these complaints (e.g. what makes you decide to file an open records request and investigate a certain body)?

(2) What do you hope to accomplish with this most recent complaint against the City of Atlanta?

(3) What have been some of the most important outcomes, in your opinion, from HB 87 in general? From the work of the IERB specifically?

(4) Many folks, myself included (as you have noted), have labeled you and your work as racist. What do you think drives folks to call your work racist/xenophobic? How do you respond to those assertions?

Regards,
Regina

—
Regina (Ari) Willis
Freelance Reporter
e: RWillisD@gmail.com

__

From: “D.A. KING”
Subject: Re: Request for interview
Date: November 9, 2016 at 2:12:32 PM EST
To: Regina Willis
Cc: sharry.smith@creativeloafing.com, debbie.michaud@creativeloafing.com, alicia.carter@creativeloafing.com, Timothy Bryant , Roger Hines

On Nov 9, 2016, at 12:05 PM, Regina Willis wrote:

Hello,

Thanks for agreeing to answer some questions. I’m interested in:

(1) Your work with the IERB. Do you know how many complaints you have filed? What source(s) inform these complaints (e.g. what makes you decide to file an open records request and investigate a certain body)

On November 9, 2016 let me first say “VIVA, DONALD TRUMP!”

I don’t work “with” the IERB. Any registered voter Ga citizen can file a valid complaint.

By my count, before the current one, I have filed four complaints with IERB. One against City of Atlanta for violation of 2011 state law against official acceptence of consular IDs such as the Mexican matricula consular. Results HERE. Because real immigrants can and must obtain and carry US ID, the only people who need documents like the matricula consular are illegal aliens. In an effort to point you and CR readers to the difference between immigrants like my adopted sister and illegal aliens, like the man who killed forever sixteen Dustin Inman, try to remember that because they are here lawfully, immigrants do not require a repeat of the “one time” amnesty of 1986 and that real immigrants are already on a path to citizenship.

At one time I had several matricula ID cards used as a way of showing how insecure they are.

I also filed three other complaints taken from public records which showed literally pages of lists of official entities that had ignored or violated state laws aimed at protecting public benefits for eligible applicants and that official employers like cities and counties don’t hire contractors that use black market labor. This would exclude illegal aliens. Complaints can be found HERE. The IERB stalled for about two years, pointedly said the complaints were too voluminous and summarily discarded one complaint section entirely, saying that they lacked resources to handle so many violations. In the end, only DeKalb county was fined $5000, and that was suspended until the county (just one of pages of violators) demonstrated compliance. There is a very inaccurate write up here from one of your fellow anti-enforcement leftists. Imagine if these same cities and counties had ignored the laws that require free health care treatment and K-12 education to illegal aliens..

I file complaints when I have time. With a little effort, I can locate and document many other violations. It became very obvious that Mayor Reed and his lawyers had re-written and ignored the state law on issuing business licenses and other public benefits without the required sworn statement that the applicant is eligible. Giving public benefits to illegals would be a serious crime in Mexico. Here, not so much. We’ll see. There are a high but unknown number of violations in Atlanta over the course of four years. I file complaints because when it comes to monitoring compliance with immigration laws, Atlanta media usually takes a walk on its responsibility to address official defiance of the law the rest of us are held to.

(2) What do you hope to accomplish with this most recent complaint against the City of Atlanta?

The law provides for serious penalties for officials and public departments that are covered by the law. My hope is that the IERB will use all of its power to send a message to the other officials who are allowed to scoff at the law. Best case? Mayor Reed takes a heavy personal fine as the final authority in charge of what are admitted violations.The citizens of Atlanta should not be required to pay any fines out of the city treasure for Reed’s defiance of state law. I have also filed complaints with the Georgia AG. So far, silence from them. Because of the Chamber of Commerce affiliated state government and having more illegals than Arizona, the Peach State is morphing into “Georgiafornia.”

(3) What have been some of the most important outcomes, in your opinion, from HB 87 in general? From the work of the IERB specifically?

The heart of HB 87 was the E-verify expansion. Despite the endless assurances that it would be a thing of the past from a gaggle of liberal reporters in 2011, Georgians are still eating state-grown peaches, onions and berries. The number of illegal aliens has been reduced, which is what happens in other states where E-Verify is mandated. We still have a long way to go, but the joyus election of “Make America Great Again!” Donald Trump as president may help to increase the outward migration of the victims of borders who lower our wages and challenge our rule of law. The IERB was set up by lobbyists from the very people it is supposed to monitor – ACCG/GMA. There is a very narrow avenue for real enforcement or sanctions. But Mayor Kasim Reed and his administrators have managed to fill all of the requirements for punishment. The 2011 law HB 87 was done due to high public outrage, in an effort to make average citizens assume everything had been taken care of in the organized crime of illegal hiring and illegal immigration. It hasn’t.

(4) Many folks, myself included (as you have noted), have labeled you and your work as racist. What do you think drives folks to call your work racist/xenophobic? How do you respond to those assertions?

People like you use “racist” when they have no way to counter the facts of pro-borders conservatives. I normally let the proud Hispanic Americans and African-Americans on my board reply to these idiot questions. You need to know: “illegal” is not a race. Neither is Hispanic.

I see that you personally have labeled many elected officials as “racist,” including sheriffs. In the limited bubble-world of totalitarian progressives, borders, immigration laws and advocates for an equal application of the law are attacked with the liberal goop of racism. Thanks to years of this race-baiting and these baseless attacks, the American people woke up, took a stand and elected Donald trump president. Like most Americans, including Barbara Jordan, we take a pro-enforcement position on borders and immigration and have the courage to say that there is no universal civil right to live in the USA or to ignore American borders or our system of laws. You, your editors and your readers should try to understand that all nations, including Mexico, have borders, refuse drivers licenses and benefits to illegals, deport illegal aliens and protect their own citizens. You should headline your piece “Everybody I don’t like is Hitler” and call it a day. By the way, most U.S. Border Patrol Agents who are right now risking their lives to protect us are Hispanic Americans. How racist and xenophobic, ehh?

__

On November 9, 2016 at 9:39 PM, D.A. King wrote

Regina Willis , “D.A. KING”
corrected typo for accuracy and grammar – last paragraph of my reply

People like you use “racist” when they have no way to counter the facts of pro-borders conservatives. I normally let the proud Hispanic Americans and African-Americans on my board reply to these idiot questions.You need to know: “illegal” is not a race. Neither is Hispanic. I see thatyou personally have labeled many elected officials as “racist,” including sheriffs. In the limited bubble-world of totalitarian progressives, borders, immigration laws and advocates for an equal application of the law are attacked with the liberal goop of racism. Thanks to years of this race-baiting and these baseless attacks, the American people woke up, took a stand and elected Donald Trump president. Like most Americans, including Barbara Jordan, we take a pro-enforcement position on borders and immigration and have the courage to say that there is no universal civil right to live in the USA or to ignore American borders or our system of laws. You, your editors and your readers should try to understand that other nations, including Mexico, have borders, refuse drivers licenses and benefits to illegals, deport illegal aliens and protect their own citizens. You should headline your piece “Everybody I don’t like is Hitler” and call it a day. By the way, most U.S. Border Patrol Agents who are right now risking their lives to protect us are Hispanic Americans. How racist and xenophobic, ehh?

__

On Nov 14, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Regina Willis <rwillisd@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello D.A. King,

I do have a few follow up questions for you.

__

From D.A. King

On Nov 14, 2016 at 12:22 PM

(1) You’ve mentioned the board using ‘all of its power,’ both in your previous answers to my questions and in comments you made to the board. I get the sense that you are frustrated the board isn’t doing more. How would you ideally like to see the board operate?

Again, the board was dreamed up by lobbyists and lawyers from ACCG/GMA to ‘police’ their own members. It serves as a firewall. Having watched as various official entities have been caught violating the laws in HB 87 and seeing the “OK, now that D.A. King has brought forward these violations, you guys need to cut that out to avoid sanctions…” response from the board, it is difficult not to be frustrated. The IERB has subpoena power and can require the city of Atlanta to produce records that illustrate the scope of violations I have exposed. I am grateful that they voted to do that on this case. These are the clear violations the AJC and other sanctimonious Atlanta media have ignored. The General Assembly should abolish the IERB and the pubic should demand that violations of laws designed to safegaurd public benefits and sanctuary city laws go directly to the same system of enforcement that lowly citizen’s violations do. It should be noted that the AG’s office can still prosecute these violations, regardless of what the IERB does or does not do. Now, if I could only get a response from that office to my complaints…

You may have noticed at least one board member mention that he didn’t think there was “intent” on the part of the city of Atlanta to “knowingly” violate clearly written laws. This is a warm-up to the declaration that despite the Mayor being a former state legislator , despite having a crew of lawyers and advisors, the city of Atlanta “just didn’t understand” that it was administering public benefits in violation of a law ACCG/GMA fought – and the city and the mayor should not suffer and punishment. It’s the Comey/Hillary/bathroom server response to enforcement. Readers should remember that the next time they get a speeding ticket. Try telling the cop you just didn’t know about traffic laws…

(2) What do you make of the fact that you lobbied/advocated for HB 87 and subsequently are the primary person to use the IERB that law created? Why do you think you’re the primary person filing complaints?

Few other people even know the process. Most Americans have no clue how their government really works. Especially on the state and local level. My educated guess is that more people look forward to root canals than know about the IERB – or state law designed to stop illegal aliens from taking benefits and jobs meant for hard working legal immigrants and Americans.

(3) How do you think “the limited bubble-world of totalitarian progressives,” approaches immigration policy?

Ha! With the goal of open borders through thinking less and race-baiting more, the game is to blur the line between honest and law-abiding immigrants and the illegal aliens who are merely undocumented future Democrat-gimme more voters while smearing anyone, regardless of description, who stands up to say we should enforce our immigration and employment laws as enthusiastically and as unapologetically as does Mexico. Most people don’t know we take in more legal immigration than any nation on the planet. More than a million a year. While screaming for better jobs and higher pay, the mindless left joins the Wall St. Journal anything-for-a- buck right in trying for limitless immigration – open borders – clueless to the natural laws of supply and demand. To help out: More workers means lower wages. I grew up in a blue-collar working class family. It is stunning that people accept the ridiculous dogma that we need more immigration to be “fair” – while wages for working Americans are going down in real dollars.
What is your fear about what would happen if those policies went into effect?

It is easy to argue that in part they are already in effect in Obama’s America. Without a reverse, it’s Adios America – official open borders combined with the welfare state that is 21st century America and the current interpretation of birthright citizenship means we would further our current reputation as the ultimate destination for world-wide migration. Most of us prefer a real country to a teeming tower-of-Babel, lawless, welfare-admin region that will soon look more like a sci-fi movie than a constitutional republic with a rule of law if people don’t start recognizing the obvious. I always enjoy asking which laws the “tolerant progressives” want enforced and which ones they chose to ignore. A brilliant answer is evident in watching the freaked-out leftist media snivel and the loving millennials rioting in American streets screaming that Trump and American police should be murdered because they don’t like the results of the election. In today’s bizarro world, “racists” are people who are winning an argument with liberals. With Trump’s election, mainstream America just won a whopper of an argument. To quote about a gazillion conservatives on Twitter lately: “Liberal tears taste so sweet…”

Attachment to complaint of September 19, 2016

It has come to my attention that the City of Atlanta has been issuing/renewing business licenses to a substantial, but unknown, number of entities without collecting the SAVE affidavits required by OCGA 50-36-1 since 2012. Earlier this month the City of Atlanta replied to my open records request (well beyond the lawful three-day time period) in which I asked, in part, for copies of these affidavits from the Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials (GALEO), which has its business office in Atlanta. I am assuming that GALEO has renewed their business license.

The City of Atlanta was unable to produce these copies for the years 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016. Please note: I am not sure if the renewal period is over yet for 2016.

In a follow-up request, I am also seeking the same records from the year 2012.

In a response (marked “A”) to my August complaint to the IERB, the City of Atlanta has made it clear that they have knowingly and intentionally made a practice of non-compliance with OCGA 50-36-1 for non-profit corporations since this law went into effect in 2012. GALEO is a non-profit corporation.

The reasoning from the City of Atlanta seems to be that since it is waiving the business license fee for a particular applicant, that it is somehow excused from collecting the SAVE affidavit which is designed to help safeguard public benefits from being administered to illegal aliens and others who are not eligible.

There is no exception for non-profit applicants for public benefits in the language of OCGA 50-36-1.

The City of Atlanta appears to have invented and implemented its own version of state law while acting in clear violation of actual state law over which the IERB has clear enforcement and sanction power.

The City of Atlanta has already provided documents ( marked “B”) that show it is issuing/renewing business licenses for a non-profit applicant (Atlanta History Center) each year – see attached.

These facts indicate that there are a large number of applications for business licenses that have been illegally processed by the City of Atlanta since 2012. It is my intent to quantify that process and learn exactly how many violations have occurred.

I am of the respectful opinion that the IERB can accomplish this task much easier and with much less drain on time and resources than my own efforts by using its authority to gain access to the number of the City of Atlanta’s business licenses that have been renewed for the non-profit entities without collection of a SAVE affidavit as required by law.

Example: If I understand them, the records I have obtained from the Department of Audits and Accounts show that the City of Atlanta issued or renewed around 18,000 business licenses in the year 2015.

These records do not include the Atlanta History Center or GALEO – which are both non-profits.

I respectfully submit that using the information supplied by the City of Atlanta on its policy, the IERB can easily subpoena records from the City of Atlanta that show the number of non-profit applicants for business license renewal that were business license holders before OCGA 50-36-1 became law (not included in that list) for each year since 2012 to learn the scope of the violations.

I respectfully urge the IERB to use its authority to call a hearing on this matter and to impose the sanctions that will prevent or stop other public agencies from fearless violation of law that was carefully vetted by the General Assembly and signed into law by the governor in an effort to safeguard public benefits in Georgia.

According to OCGA 50-36-1 (f) “…an agency or political subdivision providing or administering a public benefit shall require every applicant for such benefit to:

(A) Provide at least one secure and verifiable document, as defined in Code Section 50-36-2, or a copy or facsimile of such document. Any document required by this subparagraph may be submitted by or on behalf of the applicant at any time within nine months prior to the date of application so long as the document remains valid through the licensing or approval period or such other period for which the applicant is applying to receive a public benefit; and

(B) Execute a signed and sworn affidavit verifying the applicant’s lawful presence in the United States under federal immigration law; provided, however, that if the applicant is younger than 18 years of age at the time of the application, he or she shall execute the affidavit required by this subparagraph within 30 days after his or her eighteenth birthday. Such affidavit shall affirm that:

(i) The applicant is a United States citizen or legal permanent resident 18 years of age or older; or

(ii) The applicant is a qualified alien or nonimmigrant under the federal Immigration and Nationality Act, Title 8 U.S.C., 18 years of age or older lawfully present in the United States and provide the applicant’s alien number issued by the Department of Homeland Security or other federal immigration agency.

“…the intentional and knowing failure of any agency head to abide by the provisions of this chapter shall:

(1) Be a violation of the code of ethics for government service established in Code Section 45-10-1 and subject such agency head to the penalties provided for in Code Section 45-10-28, including removal from office and a fine not to exceed $10,000.00; and

(2) Be a high and aggravated misdemeanor offense where such agency head acts to willfully violate the provisions of this Code section or acts so as to intentionally and deliberately interfere with the implementation of the requirements of this Code section.

Please contact me with any questions. I look forward to your reply.

I am attaching all the documents from the City of Atlanta referred to above.

D.A. King

IERB Attachment to complaint of 18 August, 2016 – City of Atlanta

I have reason to believe that the city of Atlanta is and has been in violation of OCGA 50-36-1 since 2013 by not verifying eligibility for the issuance and renewal of business licenses, which are public benefits in Georgia.

On July 25, 2016 I made a lawful request for public records from the City of Atlanta’s business license department for multiple affidavits from an Atlanta-operated business that are required to be collected before a business license is issued. The business entity in question is the Atlanta Historical Society, which operates the Atlanta History Center.

My request was for copies of the E-Verify and SAVE affidavits pertaining to Atlanta Historical Society business license renewal applications for the years 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 as well as other documents required by state law. Please see my original request via email and some of the various responses from the City of Atlanta representatives attached.

The SAVE affidavit requirement falls under the authority of the IERB as it is mandated in OCGA 50-36-1.

(5) “SAVE program” means the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program operated by the United States Department of Homeland Security or a successor program designated by the United States Department of Homeland Security for the same purpose.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (d) of this Code section or where exempted by federal law, every agency or political subdivision shall verify the lawful presence in the United States under federal immigration law of any applicant for public benefits.

As of today’s date, I have not received any of the requested copies of the documents in question, including the notarized SAVE affidavit. I suspect that the reason Atlanta officials have not forwarded the requested copies to me is that the original documents which are required by law do not exist.

To be clear: My complaint does not involve public records laws but only the requirement that all agencies that administer public benefits collect the SAVE affidavit before processing applications for or issuing such benefits, including business licenses.

Being that Atlanta city officials refuse to comply with my open records request, perhaps the IERB will consider use of its subpoena power to discover the existence – or absence – of the requested SAVE affidavit.

Because of past experience with the IERB, I feel obligated to add that I have little expectation of enthusiastic or effective oversight, investigation or meaningful sanctions if my suspicions of violation of state law were ever proven valid.

D.A. King – citizen
Marietta, Ga.
404-316-6712

Sent to City of Atlanta, Information Management (via email)

25 July, 2016

To whom it may concern,

Please consider this email my official request for public records as designated under Georgia’s Open Records Act.

Please send me copies of the following documents for the years 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 as filed by the Atlanta Historical Society
* Notarized E-Verify Affidavit

* Notarized SAVE Affidavit

* Copy of government issued ID filed by applicant

* Business license issued for Atlanta Historical Society

I am happy to pay any lawfully accessed copy fees, but would prefer an electronic response.

Please contact me with any questions. I look forward to your timely reply.

Thank you,

D.A. King
2984 Lowe Trail
Marietta, Ga. 30066
404-316-6712
__
Greetings,

We are in receipt of your email and evaluating your request. We will follow-up with you regarding our findings by Friday, August 11, 2016.

Thanks,

Lolita R. Ferrell, MBA | Management Analyst
City of Atlanta | Department of Finance | Office of the CFO
68 Mitchell Street SW, Suite 11100 | Atlanta, GA 30303
t: 404.330.6901 | m: 404.323.6273 | f: 404.589.2782
e: lrferrell@atlantaga.gov | w: www.atlantaga.gov
__

On Aug 12, 2016, at 1:34 PM, DOFBusinessOffice wrote:

Greetings,

Attached you will find the final response to your Open Records Request.

Thanks,
DOF Business Office Team

Department of Finance | Business Office
City of Atlanta | City Hall Tower | Office of the Chief Financial Officer
68 Mitchell Street SW, Suite 11100 | Atlanta, GA 30303
p: 404.330.6430 | e: dofbusinessoffice@atlantaga.gov | w: www.atlantaga.gov

From: D.A. KING [mailto:Dking1952@comcast.net] 
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 2:50 PM
To: DOFBusinessOffice
Cc: Phil Kent
Subject: Re: Open Records request

Ms. Ferrell,

Thank you for a response. However, this reply in no way matches the lawful open records request I made On July 25.
I am now working on the assumption that because you have not forwarded copies of the documents I have requested, they do not exist.

If the City of Atlanta has indeed issued and renewed a business license for the Atlanta Historical Society without soliciting and receiving the affidavits I requested, there is a serious violation of state law ( OCGA 50-36-1, OCGA 50-36-2 as examples) to be addressed in addition to the fact that the open records request saw no action in the three-day period clearly required by separate state law.

D.A. King

Cc;
Mr. Phil Kent, Publisher, Insider Advantage Georgia
Member, Georgia Immigration Enforcement Review Board