This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on October 8, 2012 8:43 AM. The previous post in this blog was The sustainability center is dead, for now. The next post in this blog is Water lawsuit records leaked. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Monday, October 8, 2012

Reader poll: Which Hales statement was untrue?

Portland mayoral candidate Charlie Hales filed his tax returns as a Washington State resident for six years, even though he voted in Oregon during that time. The two are incompatible, because the test for Oregon residency is the same for both voting and tax purposes: domicile. Oregon law clearly states that an individual can have only one domicile at any one time.

When critics point this out, the Hales backers cough and mumble something, but it never holds water. His two positions are inconsistent on their face.

Willfully lying about one's residence for either Oregon voting purposes or Oregon tax purposes is a Class C felony. But if Hales committed a felony, it was only one, not two, because he did have his domicile in one place or the other.

Which statement do you think was untrue?

Which Hales statement wasn't true?
pollcode.com free polls 

Comments (19)

Howzabout asking for his WA tax returns?

There is a third option. 2004 to 2009 is a long time. Perhaps he was lying to one agency for some years but lying to the other for the other years.

The election law felonies are much more numerous in what else is implied by the first lie (to keep the lie going). It seems safest for him to amend his taxes and take the hit there to salvage his election law problems. You would think, right?

But no, when he switched his residency in 2008 by reregistering from Hayden Island to Eastmoreland, it was not the last place he lived while temporarily away (which as I also point out in my complaint cannot be used as that is intended for real temporary living). It would seem then that there are many reasons why he could be guilty of both sets of felonies.

I got a lot of people sending me data supporting one domicile or the other, but I did not confirm any of it and as such I did not republish it. That is why we need to have a real investigation that determines his real domicile, and at what times he was in each domicile.

Maybe they are going to actually investigate this second time? I got an acknowledgement, rather than disclaimer of jurisdiction, from the Secretary of State. Maybe they will spend more than three minutes on it?

The tax people say they cannot discuss the progress of their investigation. I keep trying to get the two agencies to talk to one another.

Even if they wait until after the election the charter would force him to vacate if it went down that path. So I am not sure why they are waiting.

One thing I wonder is if Jefferson wins by default or they appoint or whatever. Somebody should look into that. What is the process at each stage of the election process? Does Eileen get to run again? Ballots are already being printed.

You'd think that someone would be interested in this - journalists, election officials, the district attorney. But no, apparently when someone like Charlie Hales does it, it's no big deal.

I wonder if someone like me did this if officials would consider it "no big deal."

Finally someone asks the pertinent question here: It's either/or. The many comments that said Hales was ineligible to vote in Oregon plus he was a tax cheat, missed the point. It was one or the other, and I never heard anyone say he didn't live with his new wife in Washington. Maybe he didn't, but I've never heard anyone claim that.

So that would mean that the tax thing goes away, but the voting here is a problem. You also mentioned "state of mind" in another post and I have no idea how that applies as a legal term.

I do know my state of mind about the voting though: I'm over it and I know I'm consistent about it because when they had Ann Coulter in one of these, I said to myself, "They have to do better than that. As much as I despise her, we can't take her out for voting in the wrong place."

You have to understand: In my list of people or things I really don't like, Ann Coulter comes in just above the ebola virus - but I couldn't see convicting her of a voting crime. If I were the DA and someone came to me with that, I'd say go find something serious.

By the way, I came to that conclusion in the good old days, long before I met Jefferson Smith and realized what a disaster he would be as a mayor.

Piety is a noble goal, but we have to let some things slide here in the real world. I know because I once overlooked what a jerk Terrill Owens is when he was on my team, the Philadelphia Eagles.

Yet another doofus who is running for public office!
Either way he's a crook!

"WA tax returns"

WA doesn't have an income tax which is the crux of the issue and Mr Hales motivation for staying there.

Besides, I think Sam permanently moved the bar for lying by elected officials being a felony.

In 2003 through 2005, Multnomah County imposed an income tax of 1.25% of Oregon taxable income on county residents. I wonder if anyone fortunate to have a second home outside of the county, switched their tax residence, but neglected to change their voting, driver license, and automobile registration address.

Hales doubled-down on having been an Oregon resident (domiciled in Oregon), apparently to avoid the complaint that he couldn't run for mayor because he wasn't residing in Oregon the last time he registered to vote here. Having doubled-down, e.g. "I was domiciled in Oregon, even though I was living with my new wife in Stevenson," he's a tax cheat, i.e. voting to impose taxes that he chose not to pay.

Which statement ISN'T true ... ?

That is a technique that the Oregon Blue Book calls a "Dave Hunt" where you have to vote YES in order to vote NO.

Why doesn't Charlie just say, "Yes, I'm an Oregon resident and here's my check for the back taxes that I owe."

I wonder the same thing myself. Maybe because it isn't true. Maybe because he can't find an accountant willing to prepare a return that's inaccurate.

Or maybe because this guy still wants it both ways.

In any event, at the very least the tax statute of limitations on 2009 is still open.

Perhaps he was lying to one agency for some years but lying to the other for the other years.

You're violating the KISS rule (keep it simple, stupid).

I think when most people think of "tax cheat", they think of people who cheat on their taxes. Your definition that Hales is a tax cheat because he voted to impose taxes he himself didn't pay is a little weak.

No wait, wet Kleenex is a little weak. That's really weak.

Now, the eligibility issue? You could have something there. I know in terms of these laws for voter identification, judges sometimes rule that there is not enough time to implement something before the election, but if you think you can, go for it.

What you're really doing though is endorsing Hales for all the Portlanders who think both candidates suck. If there's an eligibility question that is adjudicated after the election, maybe it'll force us to start again.

New people, Jonathan. People who didn't quit their terms. People who didn't punch women and then try and talk their way out of it us with an explanation that sounds so ridiculous that it could have come from a 5-year-old.

Just nice new candidates with nothing to hide....Brilliant, young, energetic and decent. Decent.

Excuse me, I was daydreaming there for a second.

You can only have one domicile (legal residence) at a time. The fact that he cheated on his taxes is bad; the thing that makes it particularly repugnant is that he was voting for those taxes. It's the kind of hypocrisy that he can't reconcile; it's the kind of lie that makes a witness start to mumble on the stand; in a word, he's given everyone a golden opportunity to see that far from being fit to be mayor, he's barely fit to be a citizen.

From a comparison standpoint, while Jefferson Smith's driver's license stuff and basketball scuffle makes him far from pristine as a human (he's admitted that), the things he's accused of doing are not nearly as antithetical to basic citizenship principles as Hales' lies.

Instead of Candidates Gone Wild, WWeek or the Mercury kids should have a mock trial called, "The People vs. Charlie Hales."

Steve Novick -- of course -- would represent The People.

"Winning Mark" Wiener would represent Hales.

And to make sure the result is a f-cked up as possible, Kate Brown would be the judge.

Does it matter, at this point? Portland-area Democrats have a long and storied history of lying, even before they stuck us with Sam Adams. Both of these two are liars, but we're going to pay one of them to be our next mayor.

Out in Gresham now, you have a registered nurse who isn't one and hasn't been for 3 years, claiming proudly that she is as she runs to defend her state legislative seat.

Lies, lies, and more lies. Yet they keep getting elected. At this point, I don't think it's reasonable to blame the liars - they've seen what works here.

There are other potential felonies for false swearing on tax returns, on voter registration forms, and on each Oregon vote-by-mail envelope he mailed in. The full story is laid out in the complaints filed by Seth Woolley, available here:




Oops. I think he lived in Washington, but didn't read the "vote for the untrue one" instructions carefully enough before clicking.

Another vote for LaVonne Griffin-Valade here (at least vote by mail will help me check the spelling & hyphenation).


Who you gonna believe...Charlie, or your lying legal mind?

Clicky Web Analytics