Racketeering, organized crime monopoly against the public and the City of San Diego
Who The F**K would be concerned
You mean the same gang of people that trains the so called Special Para force in the front of the house.
Let's be specific now, 2nd & 3rd generation quackery
Hiding behind the shield of which scary militant Law force agencies ?

Knowingly allowed, if not supplied,... (apparently now shut down due to exposure)
The wide open use of Crystal Methamphetamine and other drugs in the back side of the house
DISGUSTING TO WATCH
Highly trained Gliderport and Police personnel, turned there heads, even picking a few off for arrest

Effectively destroying our hang glider club for power, control & greed

These are the same people now in control
That have basically written the Lease..
That we have to pay.... Private 3rd party city gang to use our park,
That are diverting our payed funds to private 3 party accounts

That are Still posing a threat of violence and safety to myself, others and the public.
THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS ~
THEY SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY STOPPED AND REMOVED FROM CONTROL
A NEW LEASE WRITTEN, OUR PARKS FREE OF CHARGE AND PROTECTED WITH NEW APPARENTLY NEEDED LAWS

~ Wait a Minute , You mean Santa,.... It's Santa Clause ~

HEY MR. MAYOR
WHO WOULD CARE TO COME DOWN TO THE PODIUM AND SPEAK WHILE UNDER A THREAT...
WHY DO I (THE PUBLIC) HAVE TO PAY THE PEOPLE THAT THREATEN US (THE LEASEHOLDER) TO USE OUR PUBLIC PARK.
PAYING PEOPLE THAT ARE HIDING BEHIND THE SHIELD OF THE LAW
WHILE THEY ARE DESTROYING OUR SPORT FOR CONTROL, POWER & PROFIT
A Public Monopoly, A Racketeering operation cornering the market, controlling all sale's & instruction

WHICH POINT SHOULD THIS HAVE BEEN STOPPED
I wouldn't be here if I hadn't been threaten.

By Threat & Assault ~ for Many years

1. By physical bodily harm, with intent
2. By verbal assault
3. By negligence in operation
4. By false report, or non related issues, losing pilot Lic & Rating
5. By stocking, slander, bullying
6. By Gliderport drugs violations
7. Dog fighting, (in air conflicts)
8. Entrapment
9. Discrimination
10. Personal rights
11. Tampering of aircraft
12. The list goes on
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. Threatened for speaking about... pilot injury
2. Threatened for speaking about... there employee drug issues
3. Threatened for speaking about... safety violations
4. Threatened for speaking about... the Lease agreement
5. Threatened for speaking about... Gliderport operations
6. Threatened for speaking about... Anything
7. Threatened for speaking at... City Council podium
8. Threatened for posting in the internet . (TORREY HAWKS)

WE WANT OUR HANG GLIDING AREA BACK UNDER CLUB CONTROL

~ Oh and one more thing ~

ORIGINAL WRITTEN: Jan 13, 2017

Dear Mr. Mayor
While under a threat, if it even matters to anyone anymore
Do I really need to speak at the City Council Podium

How long Mr. Mayor have you known about this Problem
~ How long do we wait for a change ~

A PUBLIC MONOPOLY
CITY COUNCIL CORRUPTION AT TORREY PINES GLIDERPORT
Point of control and corruption is held by the city councils lease agreement

The Public should Vote, Voting No on Public Park fee's
(Fee's and control going to ? private leasehold fund, company , association , cartel or other , etc)
~ WHAT ~ WAIT ~ THERE IS NO VOTE ~

A Monopoly is a situation,
by legal privilege or other agreement, in which solely one party (leaseholder, company, cartel etc)
exclusively provides a particular product or service, dominating that market and generally exerting powerful control over it.

A Privilege is the above the law privilege, Judge, Jury, trial and Executioner, enforced by threat & violence
A general threat, safety issues, false reporting and arrest, riddled with drugs and violence.

A Racketeering and Extortion operation, getting paid for park use, or for what is normally free to the public

Cornering OUR FREEDOM and the Hang Gliding Paragliding market is a form of extortion

A Corner is to drive (someone) into a corner or other space, to power and control.

Monopolies

An exclusive self appointed control and Privatization of a normally Free Public Park,
Cornering All business, trade or production of a commodity or service through exclusive leaseholder possession.
(by Possession of a unlawful corrupted City Lease Arrangement)

Getting paid for what is free by their own authorities. The privilege granting themselves the exclusive right to exert such control.
(By Mayor X , the City Council, King Pin or Boss.)

Our public park, The Hang Glider, Paragliding market and more thus controlled.

MAYOR X and The HOLDER (Leaseholder, person, company, association, cartel or other)
Any holder of such market domination in one of the the above manners can be held accountable for crimes against the public.

Rich Uncle Pennybags is the mascot of the game Monopoly.
He is depicted as a portly old man with a moustache who wears a 3 piece suit and top hat.

~ Wikipedia Hawk ~

THE BAD EXAMPLE ~ THE LEASEHOLDER CONCESSIONAIRE
Torrey Pines Gliderport ~ ABOVE THE LAW

Definition (idiomatic) ~ Exempt from the laws that apply to everyone else.

The Flight director and staff are above the law. Acting as a Company or Association they think they're above the law, but they're not.
A City Leaseholder, a Concessionaire, is in a position where one can avoid being bound by the laws that govern ordinary people. ...
A racketeering operation, extorting public money into private account under the "Color of Office"

"'The problem is a small hardcore group of employees who believe they are above the law."
All seemingly controlled by an executive leaseholder (thug) and staff which think they are above the law.
All approved by our Mayor and city council, WITH no public vote or say as to how our parks are run

Simply Claiming they didn't know and or ... & it's perfectly legal according to his city contract.
Openly Claiming that They represents the City park decisions without question and impunity to common Law

"The Gliderport leaseholder has declared himself above the law, acting with impunity."
"The leaseholder thinks he he has entitlement to funds received by a Corrupted City Lease Agreement"
"The Leaseholder is now commanding the Mayor's office and the city park real estate assets lease agreements"

THE POINT OF CORRUPTION
"The Mayor and the city council is allowing this to happen"

FURTHERMORE
A racketeering operation, Cornering the market for all Sales & Instruction
Making up site rules they don't keep themselves or are not lawful .
Collecting money for what is normally free by there own faculty.
Collecting insurance flight moneys, not needed by normal Law
A Diversion of Public funds into private accounts
The threat of violence towards those who speak out.
Threat of false reports and arrest
Threat of Lic & Rating suspension
Threat of negligent under the influence operation

POSING A THREAT Interfering with a Public witness’s testimony or cooperation in a criminal case is a criminal act that can be misdemeanor or a felony. Intimidating or tampering with a witness involves trying to get a witness to lie, say certain things under oath, alter or destroy evidence, or not testify or cooperate with authorities at all. Examples include:

- asking a witness to testify in a certain way, to lie, to not testify, to not report a crime or to not cooperate with police
- offering a witness a bribe (money, material goods, or some other benefit)
- threatening a witness with physical violence or property damage
- threatening the witness’s family members or loved ones, and
- preventing a witness from attending a legal proceeding, such as a court hearing or deposition.

Some states’ statutes criminalize intentionally influencing a witness by any means. Others require a use of force, threat of force, or use of intimidation or coercion. Under the first type of statute, simply asking a witness to testify or not to testify in your favor constitutes witness tampering. The other statutes require that the person accused actually threatened or intimidated the witness.

Coercion and intimidation can involve threats other than physical violence or property damage. An employer could threaten an employee’s job or promise a promotion if the employee will testify in a certain way or refuse to testify. A witness also could be threatened with harm to his business or reputation.

Who Can Be Accused of Witness Tampering or Intimidation
The idea that any person that threatens or tries to influence Public witness’s testimony on behalf of the leaseholder, concessionaire or the prosecution, he has committed a crime. If a Employee, relative or friend of the defendant threatens a witness or someone involved in or supporting the prosecution tries to bribe a witness, for example, both have committed witness tampering.

If the Leaseholder, Concessionaire is involved in witness tampering committed by another person, he also can be charged with a crime. For instance, if the parties involved uses an employee or pays someone to contact a witness or is involved in planning a threat or attack on a witness, he could be charged with witness intimidation or conspiracy to commit the crime.
The Leaseholder, Concessionaire has tried to influence or interfere with the witness's A prosecutor can file charges based on the witness’s statements alone, but some kind of corroborating evidence is necessary to get a conviction.

RCW 9 (1) A person is guilty of intimidating a witness if a person, by use of a threat against a current or prospective witness, attempts to:

(a) Influence the testimony of that person;
(b) Induce that person to elude legal process summoning him or her to testify;
(c) Induce that person to absent himself or herself from such proceedings; or
(d) Induce that person not to report the information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child, not to have the crime or the abuse or neglect of a minor child prosecuted, or not to give truthful or complete information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child.
(2) A person also is guilty of intimidating a witness if the person directs a threat to a former witness because of the witness's role in an official proceeding.
(3) As used in this section:
(a) "Threat" means:
(i) To communicate, directly or indirectly, the intent immediately to use force against any person who is present at the time; or
(ii) Threat as defined in *RCW 9A.04.110(27).
(b) "Current or prospective witness" means:
(i) A person endorsed as a witness in an official proceeding;
(ii) A person whom the actor believes may be called as a witness in any official proceeding; or
(iii) A person whom the actor has reason to believe may have information relevant to a criminal investigation or the abuse or neglect of a minor child.
(c) "Former witness" means:
(i) A person who testified in an official proceeding;
(ii) A person who was endorsed as a witness in an official proceeding;
(iii) A person whom the actor knew or believed may have been called as a witness if a hearing or trial had been held; or
(iv) A person whom the actor knew or believed may have provided information related to a criminal investigation or an investigation into the abuse or neglect of a minor child.
(4) Intimidating a witness is a class B felony.
(5) For purposes of this section, each instance of an attempt to intimidate a witness constitutes a separate offense.

EXTORTION by PUBLIC OFFICE
The obtaining of Money or property from another induced by contract, threatened not to speak, by force, violence, or fear, or under color of official legal right.
(fear of loosing flight licence and or issuance, under false report and discrimination)

Under the Common Law, extortion is a misdemeanor consisting of an unlawful taking of money by a government officer.
Itis an oppressive misuse of the power with which the law clothes a public officer.
Most jurisdictions have statutes governing extortion that broaden the common-law definition.
Under such statutes, any person who takes money or property from another by means of illegal compulsion may be guilty of the offense.
Extortion by a City Leaseholder or private person. under some statutes, a corporation or association may be liable for extortion.
The city is also liable for allowing the leaseholder damages and actions

Extortion by Public Officers
The essence of extortion by a public officer (leaseholder) is the oppressive use of official position to obtain a fee.
The officer (leaseholder) falsely claims authority to take that to which he or she is not lawfully entitled. This is known as acting under color of office.
For example,
Gliderport employee who collects money from recreational pilot for park use, collecting a fee is extorting money under color of office (leaseholders authority by city contract) The victim, although consenting to payment, is not doing so voluntarily but is yielding to official authority under a prearranged corrupt city contract .
Therefore with the cites consent under their city contract make the City Ultimately responsible and liable
There are few ways in which a public employee commits extortion.

~ 1. The employee collects a park use fee not allowed by law and accept it under the guise of performing an official duty park management (unlawful & illegal)
In this case the victim must at least believe that he or she is under an obligation to pay some amount.

~ 2. A daily fee or an Annual pass for site use. The crime is committed regardless by an employee unaware of the corrupted enterprise to victim and or public

~ 3. A threat of violence, punishment, false reporting, fear or loss for speaking out or exposure.

~ 4. fear of flight safety violation, negligent operation with intent.

Finally, extortion may be unknowingly committed by the employee taking a fee for services. Moneys must be collected by one within the employees to constitute extortion by a corporation or association .

Looks like our city needs a Mayor that won't let the public get burned
We need new laws preventing city assets and contract corruption.

Established as a free to fly public park ~ I believe by the (NOW STOLEN) VOLUNTARY Club donation fund
~ Not by the Now Mandatory Gliderport Site fee,... held into private corrupted funds ~

OUR PARKS ARE RUN BY WHO'S REQUIREMENTS


Public Park & Gliderport

“No San Diego resident or guest , should ever be forced to Join or be part of a Club or association or pay site dues or fees just to use a free public park to recreate.”

Likewise, in Addition:
"No resident or guest, should be MONITORED, forced to sign waivers, and buy insurance from any said private organisation or club."

Furthermore:
"Recreational Hang Gliding is already included and coverd under basic California recreational Laws."
"There is no reason the public should be Paying Private fund or private party liabilities, instruction and schools."

Statement:
" My American Rights are not negotiable, My freedom is not for sale or lease. I am Not to be exploited.

LEGAL Fact:
The City and or the Private Parties becomes Liable upon collection of moneys

NEW LAWS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NEW LAWs should be written protecting the public's interest and rights
Preventing private business enterprise from taking over & charging us to use our Public Park's
Any money's collected by the city needs to go to public ballot if approved be monitored for use and corruption

A) Nobody or group in City Office should have the power to charge the public for what is Freely Ours in the 1st place

B) These Decisions need to be brought forth to the public ballet ,...

C) If money is to be collected, Money needs to be delegated for the Public's interest,... not Private Pocket

D) Leaseholder should be held accountable for funds collected and to be monitored for corruption, with permanent oversight

E) Pilot site fee's belong to the Pilots , we need a voice as to where the money is spent and how OUR PARK IS RUN

WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK THE PUBLIC WOULD VOTE ~
~ Pay to Use our parks, not a chance ~
Where are the City Representative's that actually represent the public, Not corrupted private enterprise

~ We need new Laws, We need a Change ~
For the shame & disgrace of Our City Representatives & the Leaders our of sport
And for what has happened to our our sport of Freeflight ~

* Previewed by Many

Hey Mr. Mayor ~ Ripping Off the People Again
As history repeats ~ We want our rights back

You Mean ,... We have to pay your Gang
Hang gliding is a free sport. You rip us off

YOU STOLE OUR RIGHTS AND ARE SELLING THEM BACK TO US
Visitors ~ $10 or $300 a month to use our free public park
Locals ~ $200 a year and shut up under a threat


P.S. ~ After establishing a public payment, A RIPOFF by Threat.
I doubt our city will ever give us back our Free park, The biggest crime is the Example We are setting as a Standard

EXTORTION BY PUBLIC OFFICE & LEASEHOLDER

Elements of Extortion
Virtually all extortion statutes require that a threat must be made to the person or property of the victim. Threats to harm the victim's friends or relatives may also be included. It is not necessary for a threat to involve physical injury.

It may be sufficient to threaten, to accuse another, of a crime or to expose a secret that would result in public embarrassment or ridicule.
The threat does not have to relate to an unlawful act. Extortion may be carried out by a threat to tell the victim's friends or spouse harmful information.

Other types of threats sufficient to constitute extortion include those

~ to harm the victim's business any threat to harm another person in his or her career or reputation is extortion.

~ to take money to which one is not lawfully entitled does exist at the time of threat

~ the threat to falsely testify and arrest the victim.

~ the threat to flight licensing suspension.

~ the threat of negligent safety operation.

~ the threat of employees under the influence of drugs, on site drug sale's, police entrapment

Any unauthorized taking of money by an officer constitutes extortion. Under these statutes, a person may be held strictly liable for the act, and an intent need not be proven to establish the crime.

HEY Mr. Mayor, The I don't know ROUTINE doesn't work anymore
Any threat accompanied by the intent to acquire the recreational parties monies sufficient to establish the crime;

The I didn't know excuse that someone believes they are entitled to the money, knowingly enters a illegal contract with a city and is acting as Leaseholder at a Public Park; is guilty of extortion.

Extortion by officials is treated similarly, the crime occurs when there is a meeting of the minds between the Mayor/City council Assets contracting and the Leaseholder party.

Hey Mr. Mayor did ya know
~ The Devil wear's a Para Panties ~