mercurynews--2020-01-31--Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow blurs lines between charity and profit

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — Jay Sekulow , one of President Donald Trump ’ s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial , is being paid for his legal work through a rented $ 80-a-month mailbox a block away from the White House .
The Pennsylvania Avenue box appears to be the sole physical location of the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group , a for-profit corporation co-owned by Sekulow .
The firm has no website and is not listed in national legal directories .
The District of Columbia Bar has no record of it , and no attorneys list it as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is registered as chief counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice , a non-profit Christian legal advocacy group based in an expansive Capitol Hill row house a short walk from the Senate chamber .
Including Sekulow , a half dozen lawyers employed by the non-profit ACLJ are named in recent Senate legal briefs as members of Trump ’ s defense team — including one of Sekulow ’ s sons .
The ACLJ , as a tax-exempt 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) organization , is barred under IRS rules @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Republican National Committee has paid more than $ 250,000 to Sekulow ’ s for-profit CLA Group since 2017 , when he was first named to Trump ’ s legal team as special counsel Robert Mueller was leading the Russia investigation , according to campaign disclosures .
Sekulow has been one of Trump ’ s most visible defenders , enduring as a trusted attorney for the president even as other of his lawyers have been sidelined or entangled in controversy .
In the impeachment trial , he has sought to present Trump as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surveillance errors the FBI acknowledged making in the Russia probe and accusing Democrats of investigating the president over Ukraine simply because they couldn ’ t bring him down after the Mueller investigation .
Charity watchdogs for years have raised concerns about the blurred lines between for-profit businesses tied to Sekulow and the complex web of non-profit entities he and his family control .
The Associated Press reviewed 10 years of tax returns for the ACLJ and other charities tied to Sekulow , which are released to the public under federal law .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most recent year available , show that more than $ 65 million in charitable funds were paid to Sekulow , his wife , his sons , his brother , his sister-in-law , his nephew and corporations they own .
Daniel Borochoff , president of the American Institute of Philanthropy , said Sekulow appears to be mixing his defense of Trump with his charitable endeavors .
The group has issued a “ Donor Alert ” about ACLJ on its CharityWatch website .
“ Charities are not supposed to be taking sides in partisan political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to benefit a politician in an impeachment trial , ” Borochoff said .
“ Regulators should investigate whether or not charitable resources , such as office , labor , equipment , etc.
, are being wrongly utilized to benefit Sekulow ’ s for-profit law firm.
” The address for CLA Group listed in recent court filings matches Carr Workplaces , a flex-space provider that rents out mini offices , individual desks and conference rooms for periods as brief as one hour .
According to its website , the company also offers its customers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mailbox and mail forwarding .
A receptionist at the Carr Workplaces office confirmed the law firm ’ s mail is delivered to a mail slot in a secure room before being forwarded to another location , which she declined to disclose .
A call to Carr last week asking to be connected to CLA Group was forwarded .
After a few rings , the call was answered by a receptionist at the non-profit ACLJ .
Inquiries about Sekulow ’ s for-profit law firm were referred to Gene Kapp , a Virginia public relations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jay Sekulow is serving as a member of the President ’ s legal team in his personal capacity , ” Kapp said in an email .
“ His work with the President is separate and distinct and is not connected with his work as Chief Counsel of the ACLJ .
The ACLJ ’ s work is separate and distinct from the legal work being done for the President.
” Kapp declined to say whether CLA Group has any support staff or whether Sekulow was doing his legal work for Trump in the non-profit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also not comment on whether CLA Group was reimbursing ACLJ for any resources being utilized for Trump ’ s legal defense .
A 2005 investigation by the publication Legal Times reported about questionable spending at ACLJ , quoting former employees describing millions in charity funds being spent to support the Sekulows ’ lavish lifestyle , which included multiple homes , golf junkets , chauffeur-driven cars and a private jet used to ferry then-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia .
The Guardian and The Washington Post reported additional details in 2017 , shortly after Sekulow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Over the 10-year-period examined by AP , the tax returns show nearly $ 37 million in charitable funds were paid by ACLJ to the CLA Group , the phantom law firm listed on court filings as defending Trump .
Incorporation filings and tax records show Sekulow co-owns CLA Group with his law school classmate and longtime business partner Stuart J. Roth .
Roth is also listed as senior counsel at ACLJ and named in recent legal briefs as one of Trump ’ s defense lawyers .
North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential abuse of charitable funds raised by the organizations tied to Sekulow .
Spokeswoman Laura Brewer said it was unclear when that probe , begun in 2017 , would be complete .
Trump , Sekulow ’ s star client , has faced similar legal questions .
Trump agreed to pay $ 2 million as part of a settlement with the state of New York in which he was forced to admit he misused charitable funds from the Donald J. Trump Foundation to promote his 2016 presidential campaign , pay off business debts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hung at one of his Florida resorts .
Trump ’ s charity also cut an illegal $ 25,000 check to support the reelection of then-Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi , who now works with Sekulow as a member of the president ’ s defense team .
A Brooklyn native , Sekulow graduated from Mercer Law School in Georgia and briefly worked for the Internal Revenue Service before going into private practice in Atlanta with his former classmate Roth in the early 1980s .
The pair specialized in buying and selling historic properties as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after disgruntled investors sued them over alleged fraud and securities violations .
Court records show both Sekulow and Roth filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 1987 .
Sekulow quickly remade himself as general counsel for the group Jews for Jesus .
A self-described Messianic Jew , Sekulow won a religious liberties case before the U.S. Supreme Court after members of the group were barred from passing out pamphlets at the Los Angeles International Airport .
The following year , records show Sekulow founded the non-profit Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism ( CASE ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that religious freedom and freedom of speech are inalienable , god given rights.
” In 1992 , he was named chief counsel at the ACLJ , which was founded by televangelist Pat Robertson as a conservative counterweight to the left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union .
It is affiliated with the law school at Regent University , the Christian college founded by Robertson and located next to the studios of his Christian Broadcasting Network in Virginia Beach , Virginia .
Tax records show ACLJ now receives the bulk of its $ 23 million annual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the charity ’ s paid board members share the last name Sekulow , including Jay ’ s wife , Pam , and their sons , Jordon and Logan .
That tight-knit family control runs afoul of standards issued by multiple watchdog groups to help stem the likelihood of self-dealing and graft .
The Better Business Bureau ’ s Wise Giving Alliance recommends at least five independent board members and not more than one who receives direct financial benefits .
Bennett Weiner , who heads the BBB alliance , said it issued an advisory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t respond to requests for more information about its finances .
The Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability , founded 40 years ago by Billy Graham and other evangelical leaders to accredit Christian non-profits , requires independent boards of directors made up of people “ not related by blood or marriage to staff members.
” CASE and ACLJ are not listed among the council ’ s 2,400 members .
As Sekulow has positioned himself among Trump ’ s chief defenders in both the courtroom and as a legal analyst on Fox News , CASE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 50 million annually through an aggressive mix of telemarketing and direct mail soliciting the conservative faithful to support ACLJ ’ s courtroom advocacy .
But tax records show much of that money is routed to Sekulow and his family .
Over the 10-year period examined by AP , more than $ 12 million was paid in direct salary and benefits to Sekulow and his family members .
Gary Sekulow , Jay ’ s 61-year-old brother , was paid a total of $ 985,947 in salary and benefits in 2017 as the chief operating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CASE — two full-time positions that tax documents indicate would require him to work 80 hours each week .
Adam Sekulow , Gary ’ s 31-year-old son , was paid $ 229,227 as the director of development at CASE and $ 65,052 as the director of major donors at ACLJ the same year .
Records show millions more each year going to for-profit companies controlled by the family .
In addition to the $ 5.8 million ACLJ paid to CLA Group in 2017 , $ 1.4 million was paid to Regency Productions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ receives his fees for appearing on the radio show “ Jay Sekulow Live !
” and his television show “ ACLJ This Week with Jay Sekulow , ” which airs on the same Christian network as Pat Robertson ’ s “ The 700 Club.
” Over the 10-year period reviewed by AP , CLA Group and Regency were paid a combined $ 46 million in charitable funds by ACLJ and CASE .
Millions more were paid by the charities for “ airtime , ” though the recipients of that money were not detailed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s show is often recorded at a studio located at the Washington , D.C. , headquarters of ACLJ .
Tax records show the office building , with a current assessed value of $ 3.8 million , is owned by CASE .
The charity controlled by the Sekulow family also owns the spacious four-bedroom , four-bath rowhouse next door , which has a current assessed value of $ 1.8 million .
This week , an AP photographer saw Jay ’ s son Jordan Sekulow , 37 , entering the residence .
A graduate of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the executive director of ACLJ , a member of Trump ’ s defense team , and also hosts his father ’ s radio show .
ACLJ ’ s website and affiliated YouTube channel have been posting daily updates about the impeachment trial , reiterating GOP arguments and hammering Democratic House managers .
Jordan ’ s wife , Anna Sekulow , 36 , also works at the charity as a digital media adviser , according to its website .
The public tax records do not indicate how much they are paid .
About $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Georgia for producing Sekulow ’ s shows .
That company ’ s website lists Gary Sekulow ’ s wife , Kimberly Sekulow , 60 , as president and CEO .
The address for that business is in the same suburban Atlanta building listed on tax returns as the offices for CASE , the charity that pays it .
In addition to his two paid jobs at the non-profits , the couple ’ s son Adam Sekulow is listed as the acquisition manager at PFMS .
His sister Jennifer Sekulow , 27 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The records show at least $ 1.2 million was spent by the charities on private jets , including an unusual arrangement where CASE was paying to lease a plane co-owned by the for-profit companies controlled by Jay Sekulow and his sister-in-law .
The tax records show millions more were routed into numerous non-profit and for-profit entities , which makes it challenging to determine who is really getting the money .
For example , ACLJ and CASE made payments to the Law & Justice Institute , a non-profit entity created by Sekulow and Roth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s only activity was to make annual payments to two for-profit companies , Advocacy Services Inc. and Educational Resources Associates .
Virginia incorporation records list “ M.G .
Robertson ” of Virginia Beach as the president and director of Advocacy Services , which received $ 4 million in payments .
Marion Gordon Robertson , 89 , is better known to TV viewers by his nickname , Pat .
• New Parnas video puts him , Fruman , at Mar-a-Lago with Trump • Sen. Paul tries , fails to enter whistleblower name into the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans have not touched bottom yet Incorporation filings for Education Resources Associates in Washington , D.C , list its CEO as John Ashcroft , who served as U.S. attorney general in the administration of President George W. Bush .
That company got $ 2.2 million in consulting fees from the charitable Law & Justice Institute .
Ashcroft , 77 , is listed as a distinguished professor at Regent University and has appeared with Sekulow at ACLJ events .
Marc Owens , who served for 10 years as the director of the Exempt Organizations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the structure of the charities and corporations controlled by the Sekulow family appeared designed to obscure just who is getting paid and how much .
Federal law forbids charities from excessively benefiting those who have “ substantial influence over the organization.
” Owens said both the IRS and state attorneys general should investigate .
“ This is an apparent web of organizations that seem to exist to pay compensation to Sekulow and his family members , ” said Owens , who is now in private practice .
“ That pattern clearly raises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under Section 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) as to whether they ’ re operating for a public benefit or the private benefit of Jay Sekulow and his family members.
” “ The financial arrangements between ACLJ , CASE and other entities have been reviewed by outside independent experts and are in compliance with all tax laws , ” Kapp said .
Asked who those outside experts are and whether AP could speak with them , Kapp responded that he didn ’ t have anything to add .
Associated Press reporter Ashraf @ @ @ @ @ @

By MICHAEL BIESECKER | The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Jay Sekulow, one of President Donald Trump’s lead attorneys during the impeachment trial, is being paid for his legal work through a rented $80-a-month mailbox a block away from the White House.
The Pennsylvania Avenue box appears to be the sole physical location of the Constitutional Litigation and Advocacy Group, a for-profit corporation co-owned by Sekulow. The firm has no website and is not listed in national legal directories. The District of Columbia Bar has no record of it, and no attorneys list it as their employer.
But Sekulow, 63, is registered as chief counsel at the American Center for Law and Justice, a non-profit Christian legal advocacy group based in an expansive Capitol Hill row house a short walk from the Senate chamber.
Including Sekulow, a half dozen lawyers employed by the non-profit ACLJ are named in recent Senate legal briefs as members of Trump’s defense team — including one of Sekulow’s sons. The ACLJ, as a tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization, is barred under IRS rules from engaging in partisan political activities.
The Republican National Committee has paid more than $250,000 to Sekulow’s for-profit CLA Group since 2017, when he was first named to Trump’s legal team as special counsel Robert Mueller was leading the Russia investigation, according to campaign disclosures.
Sekulow has been one of Trump’s most visible defenders, enduring as a trusted attorney for the president even as other of his lawyers have been sidelined or entangled in controversy.
In the impeachment trial, he has sought to present Trump as unfairly hounded by investigations, seizing on surveillance errors the FBI acknowledged making in the Russia probe and accusing Democrats of investigating the president over Ukraine simply because they couldn’t bring him down after the Mueller investigation.
Charity watchdogs for years have raised concerns about the blurred lines between for-profit businesses tied to Sekulow and the complex web of non-profit entities he and his family control.
The Associated Press reviewed 10 years of tax returns for the ACLJ and other charities tied to Sekulow, which are released to the public under federal law. The records from 2008 to 2017, the most recent year available, show that more than $65 million in charitable funds were paid to Sekulow, his wife, his sons, his brother, his sister-in-law, his nephew and corporations they own.
Daniel Borochoff, president of the American Institute of Philanthropy, said Sekulow appears to be mixing his defense of Trump with his charitable endeavors. The group has issued a “Donor Alert” about ACLJ on its CharityWatch website.
“Charities are not supposed to be taking sides in partisan political activities, such as providing legal services to benefit a politician in an impeachment trial,” Borochoff said. “Regulators should investigate whether or not charitable resources, such as office, labor, equipment, etc., are being wrongly utilized to benefit Sekulow’s for-profit law firm.”
The address for CLA Group listed in recent court filings matches Carr Workplaces, a flex-space provider that rents out mini offices, individual desks and conference rooms for periods as brief as one hour. According to its website, the company also offers its customers “virtual offices” that include a mailbox and mail forwarding.
A receptionist at the Carr Workplaces office confirmed the law firm’s mail is delivered to a mail slot in a secure room before being forwarded to another location, which she declined to disclose.
A call to Carr last week asking to be connected to CLA Group was forwarded. After a few rings, the call was answered by a receptionist at the non-profit ACLJ.
Inquiries about Sekulow’s for-profit law firm were referred to Gene Kapp, a Virginia public relations contractor paid through the charity.
“Jay Sekulow is serving as a member of the President’s legal team in his personal capacity,” Kapp said in an email. “His work with the President is separate and distinct and is not connected with his work as Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. The ACLJ’s work is separate and distinct from the legal work being done for the President.”
Kapp declined to say whether CLA Group has any support staff or whether Sekulow was doing his legal work for Trump in the non-profit group’s office. Kapp would also not comment on whether CLA Group was reimbursing ACLJ for any resources being utilized for Trump’s legal defense.
A 2005 investigation by the publication Legal Times reported about questionable spending at ACLJ, quoting former employees describing millions in charity funds being spent to support the Sekulows’ lavish lifestyle, which included multiple homes, golf junkets, chauffeur-driven cars and a private jet used to ferry then-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The Guardian and The Washington Post reported additional details in 2017, shortly after Sekulow was named as Trump’s lawyer.
Over the 10-year-period examined by AP, the tax returns show nearly $37 million in charitable funds were paid by ACLJ to the CLA Group, the phantom law firm listed on court filings as defending Trump.
Incorporation filings and tax records show Sekulow co-owns CLA Group with his law school classmate and longtime business partner Stuart J. Roth. Roth is also listed as senior counsel at ACLJ and named in recent legal briefs as one of Trump’s defense lawyers.
North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein, a Democrat, is investigating the potential abuse of charitable funds raised by the organizations tied to Sekulow. Spokeswoman Laura Brewer said it was unclear when that probe, begun in 2017, would be complete.
Trump, Sekulow’s star client, has faced similar legal questions. Trump agreed to pay $2 million as part of a settlement with the state of New York in which he was forced to admit he misused charitable funds from the Donald J. Trump Foundation to promote his 2016 presidential campaign, pay off business debts and buy a $10,000 portrait of himself hung at one of his Florida resorts. Trump’s charity also cut an illegal $25,000 check to support the reelection of then-Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who now works with Sekulow as a member of the president’s defense team.
A Brooklyn native, Sekulow graduated from Mercer Law School in Georgia and briefly worked for the Internal Revenue Service before going into private practice in Atlanta with his former classmate Roth in the early 1980s. The pair specialized in buying and selling historic properties as tax shelters, but the business collapsed after disgruntled investors sued them over alleged fraud and securities violations. Court records show both Sekulow and Roth filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 1987.
Sekulow quickly remade himself as general counsel for the group Jews for Jesus. A self-described Messianic Jew, Sekulow won a religious liberties case before the U.S. Supreme Court after members of the group were barred from passing out pamphlets at the Los Angeles International Airport.
The following year, records show Sekulow founded the non-profit Christian Advocates Serving Evangelism (CASE), a charity “dedicated to the ideal that religious freedom and freedom of speech are inalienable, god given rights.”
In 1992, he was named chief counsel at the ACLJ, which was founded by televangelist Pat Robertson as a conservative counterweight to the left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union. It is affiliated with the law school at Regent University, the Christian college founded by Robertson and located next to the studios of his Christian Broadcasting Network in Virginia Beach, Virginia.
Tax records show ACLJ now receives the bulk of its $23 million annual budget from CASE. All six of the charity’s paid board members share the last name Sekulow, including Jay’s wife, Pam, and their sons, Jordon and Logan.
That tight-knit family control runs afoul of standards issued by multiple watchdog groups to help stem the likelihood of self-dealing and graft.
The Better Business Bureau’s Wise Giving Alliance recommends at least five independent board members and not more than one who receives direct financial benefits. Bennett Weiner, who heads the BBB alliance, said it issued an advisory about ACLJ after the organization didn’t respond to requests for more information about its finances.
The Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, founded 40 years ago by Billy Graham and other evangelical leaders to accredit Christian non-profits, requires independent boards of directors made up of people “not related by blood or marriage to staff members.” CASE and ACLJ are not listed among the council’s 2,400 members.
As Sekulow has positioned himself among Trump’s chief defenders in both the courtroom and as a legal analyst on Fox News, CASE has continued to raise more than $50 million annually through an aggressive mix of telemarketing and direct mail soliciting the conservative faithful to support ACLJ’s courtroom advocacy.
But tax records show much of that money is routed to Sekulow and his family. Over the 10-year period examined by AP, more than $12 million was paid in direct salary and benefits to Sekulow and his family members.
Gary Sekulow, Jay’s 61-year-old brother, was paid a total of $985,947 in salary and benefits in 2017 as the chief operating and financial officer at both ACLJ and CASE — two full-time positions that tax documents indicate would require him to work 80 hours each week.
Adam Sekulow, Gary’s 31-year-old son, was paid $229,227 as the director of development at CASE and $65,052 as the director of major donors at ACLJ the same year.
Records show millions more each year going to for-profit companies controlled by the family. In addition to the $5.8 million ACLJ paid to CLA Group in 2017, $1.4 million was paid to Regency Productions, a company owned by Jay Sekulow that receives his fees for appearing on the radio show “Jay Sekulow Live!” and his television show “ACLJ This Week with Jay Sekulow,” which airs on the same Christian network as Pat Robertson’s “The 700 Club.”
Over the 10-year period reviewed by AP, CLA Group and Regency were paid a combined $46 million in charitable funds by ACLJ and CASE. Millions more were paid by the charities for “airtime,” though the recipients of that money were not detailed in the tax records.
Sekulow’s show is often recorded at a studio located at the Washington, D.C., headquarters of ACLJ. Tax records show the office building, with a current assessed value of $3.8 million, is owned by CASE. The charity controlled by the Sekulow family also owns the spacious four-bedroom, four-bath rowhouse next door, which has a current assessed value of $1.8 million.
This week, an AP photographer saw Jay’s son Jordan Sekulow, 37, entering the residence. A graduate of Regent law school, Jordan Sekulow is the executive director of ACLJ, a member of Trump’s defense team, and also hosts his father’s radio show. ACLJ’s website and affiliated YouTube channel have been posting daily updates about the impeachment trial, reiterating GOP arguments and hammering Democratic House managers.
Jordan’s wife, Anna Sekulow , 36, also works at the charity as a digital media adviser, according to its website. The public tax records do not indicate how much they are paid.
About $6.8 million went to the company PFMS of Georgia for producing Sekulow’s shows. That company’s website lists Gary Sekulow’s wife, Kimberly Sekulow , 60, as president and CEO. The address for that business is in the same suburban Atlanta building listed on tax returns as the offices for CASE, the charity that pays it.
In addition to his two paid jobs at the non-profits, the couple’s son Adam Sekulow is listed as the acquisition manager at PFMS. His sister Jennifer Sekulow , 27, is the head of market research.
The records show at least $1.2 million was spent by the charities on private jets, including an unusual arrangement where CASE was paying to lease a plane co-owned by the for-profit companies controlled by Jay Sekulow and his sister-in-law.
The tax records show millions more were routed into numerous non-profit and for-profit entities, which makes it challenging to determine who is really getting the money.
For example, ACLJ and CASE made payments to the Law & Justice Institute, a non-profit entity created by Sekulow and Roth. Tax records show that charity’s only activity was to make annual payments to two for-profit companies, Advocacy Services Inc. and Educational Resources Associates.
Virginia incorporation records list “M.G. Robertson” of Virginia Beach as the president and director of Advocacy Services, which received $4 million in payments. Marion Gordon Robertson , 89, is better known to TV viewers by his nickname, Pat.
Related Articles Politics | A conservative case for disqualifying Donald Trump in 2024
A conservative case for disqualifying Donald Trump in 2024 Politics | Indictment shows battle between lawyer factions in White House
Indictment shows battle between lawyer factions in White House Politics | DeSantis: ‘Of course’ Donald Trump lost the 2020 election
DeSantis: ‘Of course’ Donald Trump lost the 2020 election Politics | Pence finds himself the reluctant centerpiece of case against Trump
Pence finds himself the reluctant centerpiece of case against Trump Politics | Should Trump be jailed? 2024 election may decide that Incorporation filings for Education Resources Associates in Washington, D.C, list its CEO as John Ashcroft, who served as U.S. attorney general in the administration of President George W. Bush. That company got $2.2 million in consulting fees from the charitable Law & Justice Institute. Ashcroft , 77, is listed as a distinguished professor at Regent University and has appeared with Sekulow at ACLJ events.
Marc Owens, who served for 10 years as the director of the Exempt Organizations Division of the Internal Revenue Service, said the structure of the charities and corporations controlled by the Sekulow family appeared designed to obscure just who is getting paid and how much.
Federal law forbids charities from excessively benefiting those who have “substantial influence over the organization.” Owens said both the IRS and state attorneys general should investigate.
“This is an apparent web of organizations that seem to exist to pay compensation to Sekulow and his family members,” said Owens, who is now in private practice. “That pattern clearly raises questions for those entities that are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) as to whether they’re operating for a public benefit or the private benefit of Jay Sekulow and his family members.”
Sekulow’s spokesman denied any wrongdoing.
“The financial arrangements between ACLJ, CASE and other entities have been reviewed by outside independent experts and are in compliance with all tax laws,” Kapp said.
Asked who those outside experts are and whether AP could speak with them, Kapp responded that he didn’t have anything to add.
___
Associated Press reporter Ashraf Khalil contributed to this report.


mercurynews--2020-01-31--The day Joe met Steve: Montana vs. Young looms large in history of 49ers vs. Chiefs

Sunday ’ s Super Bowl will be the most important game between the 49ers and the Chiefs , but it would take a lot for it to become the most dramatic .
That title belongs to the Joe vs. Steve Bowl and the day 49ers legend Joe Montana played his first and only game against his old team .
The visual was a shocker that September day in Kansas City : Montana wearing a red Chiefs helmet bearing an arrowhead as he warmed up across the field from the 49ers and their quarterback , Steve Young .
Young appeared deferential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greet his former teammate and rival .
Montana — the man who had waved the white flag in the long-stirring battle for 49ers quarterback supremacy a year earlier — appeared unmoved .
The whole vibe at Kansas City ’ s Arrowhead Stadium was bizarre on Sept. 11 , 1994 , as if the time-space continuum had gone sideways .
This was a grudge match in every sense of the word .
Montana , 37 , who had won four Super Bowl titles for the 49ers , including three Super Bowl MVPs , was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Young was in his fifth season as Montana ’ s successor in San Francisco — a controversial , fanbase-splitting decision that had created reality-TV worthy drama within the 49ers locker room .
It also had made both otherworldly talented grown men and future Hall of Famers at times appear childish .
In hindsight , the transition was wrenching and remains a head-shaker .
Which brings us to Sunday and the 49ers-Chiefs game that will draw millions more eyeballs than that Week 2 grudge match in 1994 .
But can Garoppolo vs. Mahomes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We were fortunate that we didn ’ t have the internet , ” back then , said then 49ers president Carmen Policy .
Bill Walsh struck gold with Montana in his first draft as 49ers coach in 1979 .
Montana was selected at the end of the third round ( No .
82 overall ) , the fourth quarterback selected .
Together they made magic , winning Super Bowls after the 1981 , 1984 and 1988 seasons — Montana orchestrating so many clutch comeback victories that the terms “ Joe Cool ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ synonymous with him .
But in 1987 , things began to change .
Concerned over the physical punishment the 31-year-old Montana was taking , Walsh traded for the 25-year-old Young .
Ill will was inevitable .
Montana was a deity in the Bay Area .
Young came to the 49ers via the fly-by-night U.S. Football League and the lowly Tampa Bay Buccaneers .
In four awkward years with Young in Montana ’ s shadows , Joe Cool would lead the 49ers to two more Super Bowl victories .
But an unfazed Young still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential with an often-injured Montana on the sidelines , throwing 23 touchdowns and just six interceptions .
“ It was very difficult because all Steve wanted to do is participate , ” said Leigh Steinberg , Young ’ s agent .
“ Bill Walsh told us that it looked like Joe Montana was going to retire because of back problems .
Famous last words .
Not only did he not retire , the situation motivated him to have some of his finest years.
” Young remained a backup in an uneasy alliance until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a starting role after years of mostly watching Montana from the sidelines .
When the transfer of power occurred it was swift , unanticipated and accompanied by sensational palace intrigue .
In 1991 , plagued by an elbow injury suffered in the 1990 NFC Championship Game , Montana was forced to sit out the entire season .
Young took over as starter and guided the 49ers to an up-and-down 10-6 season that wasn ’ t good enough to make the playoffs — the first miss since 1982 .
Montana was optimistic when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ summer .
But his elbow didn ’ t hold up .
So Young began his second season as a surrogate .
Midway through the campaign , Montana announced he was ready to go .
The team ’ s faithful were in an uproar when it didn ’ t happen .
The laid-back Bay Area turned shades of Boston , New York and Philadelphia .
George Seifert , who had replaced Walsh , was in a ticklish situation .
The team was rolling ( it would finish 14-2 ) .
So was Young , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ putting up video-game numbers under the guidance of new offensive coordinator Mike Shanahan .
Montana was allowed to play the second half of the final regular-season game .
Seifert started Young in the postseason with Montana in reserve .
A loss to Dallas in the NFC Championship game created waves of incredulity over the relegation of a four-time Super Bowl-winning quarterback to a backup role — and questions about whether Steve could ever be like Joe Cool in the clutch .
The controversy raged into the new year .
“ The problem with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Montana faithful , ” Policy said .
“ ( To them ) Joe Montana never threw an interception and the team went to the Super Bowl every day .
Montana certainly earned his iconic status and the rest of it .
“ Give Steve credit .
However desperately he wanted to start , he never complained .
He did what he could to support the team .
Internally it was killing him.
” It was a turbulent ride inside the bubble .
“ It was a situation where I would go out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and say , ‘ Say it isn ’ t so , ’ then walk away , ” Policy said .
“ I thought maybe I should hire a food taster .
The guy who was handling it best was Joe Montana himself .
He was a realist .
He knew we couldn ’ t keep both quarterbacks.
” Realism didn ’ t help the relationship between Montana and Young .
Per an Associated Press report published shortly before the Joe/Steve Bowl : “ The relationship between Montana and Young had deteriorated … to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to each other during Montana ’ s last season in San Francisco.
” “ Mostly because of Joe , who was the iceberg , ” he said .
“ Everything around him was cold at that point.
” The 49ers seemed paralyzed over what to do .
At one point the team took the fairly remarkable step of inviting reporters to lunch for an off-the-record conversation to discuss the conundrum .
At times it was difficult to know whether the 49ers were asking questions or soliciting answers .
They told Montana he would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ starting position in 1993 .
Then they inexplicably reversed course — most believe to save face publicly — and gave the position to him outright .
Montana was done with the drama .
He approved a trade to the Chiefs , which was consummated on April 20 , 1993 .
“ I knew it would be an emotional reaction , ” Policy said .
“ I had no idea of the magnitude or the width and breadth .
It ran deep and it was loud and it was unending .
Eddie ( DeBartolo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he went with our decision , as rough as it was.
” “ The team made the decision to move on , ” Steinberg said .
“ The question was not a matter of fans surrendering the veneration they had for Montana .
He earned it all.
” That season , both the 49ers and Chiefs advanced to their respective conference championship games before losing one win from the Super Bowl .
“ I would think , what if we go to the Super Bowl and we play Joe ?
” Policy said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we lost ?
Those were the nightmares.
” Montana , facing his old team , drew first blood with a 1-yard pass to Joe Valerio on a tackle-eligible play for a 7-0 lead midway through the first quarter .
Young led the 49ers to a pair of touchdowns in the second quarter but was tackled in his own end zone for a safety .
It was 14-9 49ers at halftime .
The second half belonged to the Chiefs .
Montana threw a short touchdown pass , and Marcus Allen scored on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of injuries left the 49ers ’ offensive line in tatters .
“ I felt so bad for Steve , ” Policy said .
“ Derrick Thomas came after him every play.
” “ It was a pretty good beating , ” Young would say afterward .
Thomas , another Steinberg client and a future Hall of Famer , ran wild .
“ I had Derrick teeing off on Steve , ” Steinberg said .
“ That the game was billed as this ultimate 49er civil war was not helpful .
We could have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feeling afterward ?
“ I ’ m glad it ’ s over , ” he said .
Young , who would go on to remove the monkey from his back by winning Super Bowl MVP honors and his second league MVP award four months later , was dutifully gracious to the man who would retire at season ’ s end .
“ I learned from The Master , ” Young said .
“ In a lot of ways , the master had more to teach the student .
He was great today .
@

Sunday’s Super Bowl will be the most important game between the 49ers and the Chiefs, but it would take a lot for it to become the most dramatic. That title belongs to the Joe vs. Steve Bowl and the day 49ers legend Joe Montana played his first and only game against his old team.
The visual was a shocker that September day in Kansas City: Montana wearing a red Chiefs helmet bearing an arrowhead as he warmed up across the field from the 49ers and their quarterback, Steve Young.
Young appeared deferential as he trotted across the field to greet his former teammate and rival. Montana — the man who had waved the white flag in the long-stirring battle for 49ers quarterback supremacy a year earlier — appeared unmoved.
The whole vibe at Kansas City’s Arrowhead Stadium was bizarre on Sept. 11, 1994, as if the time-space continuum had gone sideways.
This was a grudge match in every sense of the word. Montana, 37, who had won four Super Bowl titles for the 49ers, including three Super Bowl MVPs, was in his second season with the Chiefs.
Young was in his fifth season as Montana’s successor in San Francisco — a controversial, fanbase-splitting decision that had created reality-TV worthy drama within the 49ers locker room. It also had made both otherworldly talented grown men and future Hall of Famers at times appear childish.
In hindsight, the transition was wrenching and remains a head-shaker.
Which brings us to Sunday and the 49ers-Chiefs game that will draw millions more eyeballs than that Week 2 grudge match in 1994. But can Garoppolo vs. Mahomes top Joe vs. Steve for drama?
“We were fortunate that we didn’t have the internet,” back then, said then 49ers president Carmen Policy.
***
Bill Walsh struck gold with Montana in his first draft as 49ers coach in 1979. Montana was selected at the end of the third round (No. 82 overall), the fourth quarterback selected.
Together they made magic, winning Super Bowls after the 1981, 1984 and 1988 seasons — Montana orchestrating so many clutch comeback victories that the terms “Joe Cool” and “Comeback Kid” had become synonymous with him.
But in 1987, things began to change. Concerned over the physical punishment the 31-year-old Montana was taking, Walsh traded for the 25-year-old Young. Ill will was inevitable. Montana was a deity in the Bay Area.
Young came to the 49ers via the fly-by-night U.S. Football League and the lowly Tampa Bay Buccaneers. In four awkward years with Young in Montana’s shadows, Joe Cool would lead the 49ers to two more Super Bowl victories. But an unfazed Young still got plenty of chances to show his potential with an often-injured Montana on the sidelines, throwing 23 touchdowns and just six interceptions.
“It was very difficult because all Steve wanted to do is participate,” said Leigh Steinberg, Young’s agent. “Bill Walsh told us that it looked like Joe Montana was going to retire because of back problems. Famous last words. Not only did he not retire, the situation motivated him to have some of his finest years.”
Young remained a backup in an uneasy alliance until after Walsh’s departure, desirous of a starting role after years of mostly watching Montana from the sidelines. When the transfer of power occurred it was swift, unanticipated and accompanied by sensational palace intrigue.
In 1991, plagued by an elbow injury suffered in the 1990 NFC Championship Game, Montana was forced to sit out the entire season. Young took over as starter and guided the 49ers to an up-and-down 10-6 season that wasn’t good enough to make the playoffs — the first miss since 1982. Montana was optimistic when he arrived at training camp the following summer. But his elbow didn’t hold up. So Young began his second season as a surrogate.
Midway through the campaign, Montana announced he was ready to go. The team’s faithful were in an uproar when it didn’t happen. The laid-back Bay Area turned shades of Boston, New York and Philadelphia. George Seifert, who had replaced Walsh, was in a ticklish situation. The team was rolling (it would finish 14-2). So was Young, who would be voted league MVP after putting up video-game numbers under the guidance of new offensive coordinator Mike Shanahan.
Montana was allowed to play the second half of the final regular-season game. Seifert started Young in the postseason with Montana in reserve. A loss to Dallas in the NFC Championship game created waves of incredulity over the relegation of a four-time Super Bowl-winning quarterback to a backup role — and questions about whether Steve could ever be like Joe Cool in the clutch.
The controversy raged into the new year.
“The problem with the situation was in the minds of the Montana faithful,” Policy said. “(To them) Joe Montana never threw an interception and the team went to the Super Bowl every day. Montana certainly earned his iconic status and the rest of it.
“Give Steve credit. However desperately he wanted to start, he never complained. He did what he could to support the team. Internally it was killing him.”
It was a turbulent ride inside the bubble.
“It was a situation where I would go out to restaurants and people would come up and say, ‘Say it isn’t so,’ then walk away,” Policy said. “I thought maybe I should hire a food taster. The guy who was handling it best was Joe Montana himself. He was a realist. He knew we couldn’t keep both quarterbacks.”
Realism didn’t help the relationship between Montana and Young. Per an Associated Press report published shortly before the Joe/Steve Bowl: “The relationship between Montana and Young had deteriorated … to downright icy. The two barely spoke to each other during Montana’s last season in San Francisco.”
Policy corroborates the chilliness.
“Mostly because of Joe, who was the iceberg,” he said. “Everything around him was cold at that point.”
The 49ers seemed paralyzed over what to do. At one point the team took the fairly remarkable step of inviting reporters to lunch for an off-the-record conversation to discuss the conundrum. At times it was difficult to know whether the 49ers were asking questions or soliciting answers.
They told Montana he would not be allowed to compete for the starting position in 1993. Then they inexplicably reversed course — most believe to save face publicly — and gave the position to him outright.
Montana was done with the drama. He approved a trade to the Chiefs, which was consummated on April 20, 1993.
“I knew it would be an emotional reaction,” Policy said. “I had no idea of the magnitude or the width and breadth. It ran deep and it was loud and it was unending. Eddie (DeBartolo) was in such denial. But he went with our decision, as rough as it was.”
“The team made the decision to move on,” Steinberg said. “The question was not a matter of fans surrendering the veneration they had for Montana. He earned it all.”
That season, both the 49ers and Chiefs advanced to their respective conference championship games before losing one win from the Super Bowl.
“I would think, what if we go to the Super Bowl and we play Joe?” Policy said. “Or what if Joe won and we lost? Those were the nightmares.”
***
Montana, facing his old team, drew first blood with a 1-yard pass to Joe Valerio on a tackle-eligible play for a 7-0 lead midway through the first quarter.
Young led the 49ers to a pair of touchdowns in the second quarter but was tackled in his own end zone for a safety. It was 14-9 49ers at halftime.
The second half belonged to the Chiefs. Montana threw a short touchdown pass, and Marcus Allen scored on a short run. An almost unimaginable epidemic of injuries left the 49ers’ offensive line in tatters.
“I felt so bad for Steve,” Policy said. “Derrick Thomas came after him every play.”
“It was a pretty good beating,” Young would say afterward.
Thomas, another Steinberg client and a future Hall of Famer, ran wild. “I had Derrick teeing off on Steve,” Steinberg said. “That the game was billed as this ultimate 49er civil war was not helpful. We could have done without that.”
Kansas City won, 24-17.
How was Joe feeling afterward? “I’m glad it’s over,” he said.
Young, who would go on to remove the monkey from his back by winning Super Bowl MVP honors and his second league MVP award four months later, was dutifully gracious to the man who would retire at season’s end.
“I learned from The Master,” Young said. “In a lot of ways, the master had more to teach the student. He was great today.”


mercurynews--2020-01-31--Can 49ers offense outsmart Chiefs ‘landlord’ Tyrann Mathieu?

MIAMI – Tyrann Mathieu didn ’ t hold back as he dished out a damning indictment of the 49ers offense : “ Their passing game has just simplified so much , it was easy for us to anticipate routes , get some good breaks on the ball.
” That was four years ago .
Mathieu accounted for two of the Arizona Cardinals ’ four interceptions against Colin Kaepernick in a 47-7 rout .
The 49ers offense was simple to destroy .
Sunday in Super Bowl LIV , the 49ers offense will pose a colossal challenge for Mathieu , a wily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chiefs this season .
True , repeatedly running the ball at will was a simple path to success in the 49ers ’ past two playoff wins .
They surely will try that tactic again against the Chiefs .
Run .
Run .
Run again ?
Perhaps .
But coach Kyle Shanahan ’ s clever use of misdirection and motion in his play calls keep defenses guessing .
“ Of course everybody wants to run the ball , ” Shanahan said .
“ There will be a time in that game , who knows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take that away .
“ You have to counteract that .
When you do , it opens up other stuff , and that ’ s how you keep people off balance.
” Enter : Mathieu , a seven-year veteran who will roam and sniff out what the 49ers are cooking .
“ The guy doesn ’ t do the traditional looks , ” Jimmy Garoppolo said .
“ It ’ s very calculated in his head .
He knows what he ’ s doing and why .
“ You ’ ve got to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get a good read on him.
” Mathieu made First-Team All-Pro this season , doing so for the first time since 2015 , that same season he picked off Kaepernick twice and returned one of those for a touchdown .
After arriving in Arizona in 2013 as a high-risk prospect out of LSU , Mathieu not only matured as a person but he blossomed as a versatile defender .
He ’ s lived up to his “ Honey Badger ” nickname over the years , but this year he earned another moniker : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he seeks to own the field .
Mathieu has enjoyed staring down opposing team ’ s offensive coordinators after making plays this season , telling reporters he ’ s “ way too smart ” to fool .
“ I ’ m at that point in my career now where I ’ ve seen a lot of football and I ’ m pretty ball aware , ” Mathieu told NFL.com earlier this week .
“ And then it kind of messes with the coaches , right ?
!
• The day Joe met Steve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ history of 49ers vs. Chiefs • Who ’ s the most marketable Super Bowl player ?
Here ’ s a pitch for darn near all of them • Video : Breaking down 49ers ’ last comments before Super Bowl • 49ers practice report : Garoppolo says ‘ We know what the moment is ’ “ If they draw up a certain play and I like come out of nowhere and bat the ball down and look at their sideline , I would hope that that does something to the offensive coordinator.
” Shanahan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too , has matured .
He noted Friday now that he ’ s 40 , he ’ s not liable to trade verbal barbs with players , and while he doesn ’ t consider Mathieu a hot head , he does consider him an astute defender .
Said Shanahan : “ There are some guys who guess and are reckless .
There are some guys who are very prepared and take very good , educated guesses , and he ’ s one of those guys .
“ He ’ s a hard guy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter of time he ’ s going to make plays ”

MIAMI – Tyrann Mathieu didn’t hold back as he dished out a damning indictment of the 49ers offense:
“Their passing game has just simplified so much, it was easy for us to anticipate routes, get some good breaks on the ball.”
That was four years ago. Mathieu accounted for two of the Arizona Cardinals’ four interceptions against Colin Kaepernick in a 47-7 rout. The 49ers offense was simple to destroy.
Sunday in Super Bowl LIV, the 49ers offense will pose a colossal challenge for Mathieu, a wily defensive back who joined the Kansas City Chiefs this season.
True, repeatedly running the ball at will was a simple path to success in the 49ers’ past two playoff wins. They surely will try that tactic again against the Chiefs.
Run. Run. Run again? Perhaps. But coach Kyle Shanahan’s clever use of misdirection and motion in his play calls keep defenses guessing.
“Of course everybody wants to run the ball,” Shanahan said. “There will be a time in that game, who knows when, they’re going to take that away.
“You have to counteract that. When you do, it opens up other stuff, and that’s how you keep people off balance.”
Enter: Mathieu, a seven-year veteran who will roam and sniff out what the 49ers are cooking.
“The guy doesn’t do the traditional looks,” Jimmy Garoppolo said. “It’s very calculated in his head. He knows what he’s doing and why.
“You’ve got to be aware of him, and post-snap get a good read on him.”
Mathieu made First-Team All-Pro this season, doing so for the first time since 2015, that same season he picked off Kaepernick twice and returned one of those for a touchdown.
After arriving in Arizona in 2013 as a high-risk prospect out of LSU, Mathieu not only matured as a person but he blossomed as a versatile defender.
He’s lived up to his “Honey Badger” nickname over the years, but this year he earned another moniker: “The Landlord,” for how he seeks to own the field.
Mathieu has enjoyed staring down opposing team’s offensive coordinators after making plays this season, telling reporters he’s “way too smart” to fool.
“I’m at that point in my career now where I’ve seen a lot of football and I’m pretty ball aware,” Mathieu told NFL.com earlier this week. “And then it kind of messes with the coaches, right?! Related Articles San Francisco 49ers | Kurtenbach: The 49ers aren’t worried about Nick Bosa’s holdout. They should be
Kurtenbach: The 49ers aren’t worried about Nick Bosa’s holdout. They should be San Francisco 49ers | 49ers training camp: Talanoa Hufanga’s interception spoils Brock Purdy’s solid day
49ers training camp: Talanoa Hufanga’s interception spoils Brock Purdy’s solid day San Francisco 49ers | 49ers appear to have job openings among NFL’s No. 1-ranked defense
49ers appear to have job openings among NFL’s No. 1-ranked defense San Francisco 49ers | 49ers mailbag: Are rookie Moody’s kicking misses cause for concern?
49ers mailbag: Are rookie Moody’s kicking misses cause for concern? San Francisco 49ers | 49ers: Shanahan sees bright side of Trey Lance’s performance vs. Raiders
“If they draw up a certain play and I like come out of nowhere and bat the ball down and look at their sideline, I would hope that that does something to the offensive coordinator.”
Shanahan won’t flinch. He, too, has matured. He noted Friday now that he’s 40, he’s not liable to trade verbal barbs with players, and while he doesn’t consider Mathieu a hot head, he does consider him an astute defender.
Said Shanahan: “There are some guys who guess and are reckless. There are some guys who are very prepared and take very good, educated guesses, and he’s one of those guys.
“He’s a hard guy to get. There’s a matter of time he’s going to make plays.”


mercurynews--2020-01-31--Letter: Give tax cuts to people who’ll spend the money

Re : “ U.S .
budget deficit to top $ 1 trillion for next decade ” ( Page A8 , Jan. 29 ) : A $ 1-trillion deficit each year for the next 10 years .
Another Donald Trump broken promise .
The supply-siders just don ’ t get it .
Tax cuts mainly for the wealthy do not stimulate the economy to bring in extra revenue , because wealthy people do not spend that extra money .
They don ’ t have to .
They already have plenty .
If you are going to use the tax system to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be given to the people who will spend the extra money , the middle class .
• Letter : Today ’ s Republicans have not touched bottom yet • Letter : I was once homeless — Measure E would help • Letter : We can not let animals devour our tax dollars The middle class spends the extra money and increases demand for goods and services .
The wealthy invest their capital , the capital they already have to satisfy that demand .
We middle class get the goods and services we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone walks away happy .
That is the way it works .
It does not work any other way .
Submit your letter to the editor via this form Read more Letters to the Editor

Give tax cuts to people
who’ll spend the money
Re: “U.S. budget deficit to top $1 trillion for next decade” (Page A8, Jan. 29):
A $1-trillion deficit each year for the next 10 years. Another Donald Trump broken promise.
The supply-siders just don’t get it. Tax cuts mainly for the wealthy do not stimulate the economy to bring in extra revenue, because wealthy people do not spend that extra money. They don’t have to. They already have plenty.
If you are going to use the tax system to increase revenue, then the tax cuts must be given to the people who will spend the extra money, the middle class.
Related Articles Letters to the Editor | Letters: Escape Bay Area | CASA program | Feinstein replacement | Faulty comparison | Not conservatives
Letters: Escape Bay Area | CASA program | Feinstein replacement | Faulty comparison | Not conservatives Letters to the Editor | Letters: Psychiatric beds | SJSU neglect | Squandering cash | Overdoing coverage | Pac-12 negotiations | For climate’s sake | Electric appliances
Letters: Psychiatric beds | SJSU neglect | Squandering cash | Overdoing coverage | Pac-12 negotiations | For climate’s sake | Electric appliances Letters to the Editor | Letters: Abandoning tenants | Deaf culture | Western contributions | Conservative alienation | Precise language
Letters: Abandoning tenants | Deaf culture | Western contributions | Conservative alienation | Precise language Letters to the Editor | Letters: Insulate wires | CDE was wrong | Functional Chromebooks | Trump’s ego | Healthy debate | A new path
Letters: Insulate wires | CDE was wrong | Functional Chromebooks | Trump’s ego | Healthy debate | A new path Letters to the Editor | Letters: Local solar | Titan resources | Activism helps The middle class spends the extra money and increases demand for goods and services.
The wealthy invest their capital, the capital they already have to satisfy that demand. We middle class get the goods and services we want and the rich get richer and everyone walks away happy.
That is the way it works. It does not work any other way.
Joseph Rizzuto
Los Gatos
Submit your letter to the editor via this form
Read more Letters to the Editor


Word Game: Jan. 31, 2020

Can you find 40 or more words in PRESIDED ?
The list will be published tomorrow .
To purchase the @ @ @ @ @ WordGameBooks.com .
Order it now for just $ 5 while supplies last !
1 .
@ @ @ @ @ or more letters .
2 .
Words that acquire four letters by the addition of @ @ @ @ @ as “ bats ” or “ dies , ” are not allowed .
3 .
@ @ @ @ @ a “ d ” or an “ s ” may not be used .
For @ @ @ @ @ ” is used , “ baked ” or “ bakes ” are not allowed , @ @ @ @ @ “ baking ” are admissible .
4 .
Proper nouns , slang words , or @ @ @ @ @ are not allowed .

TODAY’S WORD — PRESIDED (PRESIDED: prih-ZIDE-ed: Acted as president, chairman or moderator.)
Average mark 30 words
Time limit 40 minutes
Can you find 40 or more words in PRESIDED? The list will be published tomorrow.
YESTERDAY’S WORD — SYLLOGISM sill silly silo slim slimy slog
smog soil yogi lily limy lissom logy loss oily gill gismo gloss glossy
golly illy mill milo miso miss missy moil molly moss mossy Myosis
To purchase the Word Game book, visit WordGameBooks.com. Order it now for just $5 while supplies last!
RULES OF THE GAME:
1. Words must be of four or more letters.
2. Words that acquire four letters by the addition of “s,” such as “bats” or “dies,” are not allowed.
3. Additional words made by adding a “d” or an “s” may not be used. For example, if “bake” is used, “baked” or “bakes” are not allowed, but “bake” and “baking” are admissible.
4. Proper nouns, slang words, or vulgar or sexually explicit words are not allowed.
Contact Word Game creator Kathleen Saxe at kzsaxe@gmail.com.


mercurynews--2020-01-31--Horoscopes Jan. 31, 2020: Justin Timberlake on the brink of 40

Happy Birthday : Aggressive behavior won ’ t settle matters the way you hoped this year .
Take a moment to decipher what you need to do to clear up any matters that could stand between you and the goals you set .
You ’ ll get much further and gain respect , support and praise if you are positive and easygoing .
Make each day count .
Your numbers are 4 , 11 , 21 , 24 , 32 , 37 , 46 .
ARIES ( March 21-April 19 ) : Consider what excites you most , and plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ path .
It ’ s up to you to make the adjustments in your life that will lead to greater happiness .
Don ’ t let the past cloud your vision or stifle your plans .
3 stars TAURUS ( April 20-May 20 ) : Be careful what you do .
Have a strategy in place before you share your ideas .
Change can be useful , but only if done correctly .
If emotional impulsiveness is behind what you do , you may want to reconsider .
3 stars GEMINI ( May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a kind heart will encourage better relationships , but don ’ t forget , it takes two to tango .
If you aren ’ t getting back as much as you are giving , consider if you are associating with the right people .
4 stars CANCER ( June 21-July 22 ) : Keep your life simple , and don ’ t make hasty decisions or unrealistic demands .
Focus on creativity , love and romance if you want to make the most of your day .
The right person will bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stars LEO ( July 23-Aug. 22 ) : Make a move for the right reason .
Impulse will lead to poor judgment and trouble .
Ask questions before you make a decision that can disrupt your life professionally or personally .
Do what ’ s right and best for you .
5 stars VIRGO ( Aug. 23-Sept. 22 ) : If you have a vision , dream or a great idea , start the ball rolling .
How you go about projecting who you are and what you want to do will improve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a part of your life and your dreams .
5 stars LIBRA ( Sept. 23-Oct. 22 ) : Stick to basics , finish what you start and take on only what you know you can do .
Don ’ t give in to other people ’ s demands , or you will give up the freedom to do what matters to you most .
3 stars SCORPIO ( Oct. 23-Nov. 21 ) : Make plans to do something that excites you .
Venturing into unfamiliar territory will be a growth experience that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to pursue next .
Push negativity away , and positive options will transform your life .
3 stars SAGITTARIUS ( Nov. 22-Dec. 21 ) : Make adjustments to the way you live .
Move things around , and set up a workstation that will give you the ability to turn an idea into something tangible .
Don ’ t let anyone interfere in your life or with your dreams .
5 stars CAPRICORN ( Dec. 22-Jan. 19 ) : Listen carefully in order to avoid making a mistake .
Emotions will be difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When in doubt , ask questions .
Your reaction toward others will determine how well you ’ ll do .
Show compassion .
2 stars AQUARIUS ( Jan. 20-Feb. 18 ) : Keep moving forward .
Address matters that can influence your position or help you use your skills , experience and knowledge to get ahead .
Branch out to see how much you can accomplish .
Aim to please , charm and get ahead .
4 stars PISCES ( Feb. 19-March 20 ) : Stay focused on what ’ s important @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others to pay more attention to the causes and concerns you want to address .
Refuse to let anyone limit what you set out to do .
Follow your heart and your dreams .
3 stars Birthday Baby : You are curious , unpredictable and resourceful .
You are charismatic and sensitive .

CELEBRITIES BORN ON THIS DAY: Mario Williams, 35; Justin Timberlake, 39; Kerry Washington, 43; Portia de Rossi, 47.
Happy Birthday: Aggressive behavior won’t settle matters the way you hoped this year. Take a moment to decipher what you need to do to clear up any matters that could stand between you and the goals you set. You’ll get much further and gain respect, support and praise if you are positive and easygoing. Make each day count. Your numbers are 4, 11, 21, 24, 32, 37, 46.
ARIES (March 21-April 19): Consider what excites you most, and plan to spend more time heading down that path. It’s up to you to make the adjustments in your life that will lead to greater happiness. Don’t let the past cloud your vision or stifle your plans. 3 stars
TAURUS (April 20-May 20): Be careful what you do. Have a strategy in place before you share your ideas. Change can be useful, but only if done correctly. If emotional impulsiveness is behind what you do, you may want to reconsider. 3 stars
GEMINI (May 21-June 20): An open mind and a kind heart will encourage better relationships, but don’t forget, it takes two to tango. If you aren’t getting back as much as you are giving, consider if you are associating with the right people. 4 stars
CANCER (June 21-July 22): Keep your life simple, and don’t make hasty decisions or unrealistic demands. Focus on creativity, love and romance if you want to make the most of your day. The right person will bring out the best in you. 2 stars
LEO (July 23-Aug. 22): Make a move for the right reason. Impulse will lead to poor judgment and trouble. Ask questions before you make a decision that can disrupt your life professionally or personally. Do what’s right and best for you. 5 stars
VIRGO (Aug. 23-Sept. 22): If you have a vision, dream or a great idea, start the ball rolling. How you go about projecting who you are and what you want to do will improve your relationships with people who want to be a part of your life and your dreams. 5 stars
LIBRA (Sept. 23-Oct. 22): Stick to basics, finish what you start and take on only what you know you can do. Don’t give in to other people’s demands, or you will give up the freedom to do what matters to you most. 3 stars
SCORPIO (Oct. 23-Nov. 21): Make plans to do something that excites you. Venturing into unfamiliar territory will be a growth experience that will help you choose what you want to pursue next. Push negativity away, and positive options will transform your life. 3 stars
SAGITTARIUS (Nov. 22-Dec. 21): Make adjustments to the way you live. Move things around, and set up a workstation that will give you the ability to turn an idea into something tangible. Don’t let anyone interfere in your life or with your dreams. 5 stars
CAPRICORN (Dec. 22-Jan. 19): Listen carefully in order to avoid making a mistake. Emotions will be difficult to control if a misunderstanding takes place. When in doubt, ask questions. Your reaction toward others will determine how well you’ll do. Show compassion. 2 stars
AQUARIUS (Jan. 20-Feb. 18): Keep moving forward. Address matters that can influence your position or help you use your skills, experience and knowledge to get ahead. Branch out to see how much you can accomplish. Aim to please, charm and get ahead. 4 stars
PISCES (Feb. 19-March 20): Stay focused on what’s important to you and how you can persuade others to pay more attention to the causes and concerns you want to address. Refuse to let anyone limit what you set out to do. Follow your heart and your dreams. 3 stars
Birthday Baby: You are curious, unpredictable and resourceful. You are charismatic and sensitive.
Visit Eugenialast.com, or join Eugenia on Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn.


Bridge: Jan. 31, 2020

“ If you ’ re not living on the edge , you ’ re taking up too much room.
” — graffiti Today ’ s North-South bid to 3NT as if it were their last day on Earth .
South ’ s three clubs to try for game was slightly bold .
When he bid 3NT , he was living on the edge — or beyond .
South took the ace of hearts and led a club to his king , winning .
He next tried a spade to dummy ’ s jack .
East won and returned a heart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the defenders were sure of five tricks before South had nine .
After his king of clubs wins , South should go to the ace of diamonds to lead a second club .
East takes the ace , and the defense cashes three diamonds , but South wins the heart return , unblocks the queen of clubs and goes to the ace of spades to run the clubs .
He has nine tricks .
It looks as if South is living on the edge by spending the ace of diamonds , but if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an entry to lead the second club from dummy , East can win and lead a diamond effectively .
You hold : S K 9 8 6 H K 10 7 D 8 7 5 C K Q 9 .
Your partner opens one heart , you respond one spade and he bids 1NT .
The opponents pass .
What do you say ?
ANSWER : All you need to do is bid two hearts .
Partner should treat that call as invitational to game , showing 10 or 11 points .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if you had six to nine points , you would have raised directly to two hearts .
A jump to three hearts now would be forcing .

“If you’re not living on the edge, you’re taking up too much room.” — graffiti
Today’s North-South bid to 3NT as if it were their last day on Earth. South’s three clubs to try for game was slightly bold. When he bid 3NT, he was living on the edge — or beyond.
South took the ace of hearts and led a club to his king, winning. He next tried a spade to dummy’s jack. East won and returned a heart, forcing out the king, and the defenders were sure of five tricks before South had nine.
SECOND CLUB
After his king of clubs wins, South should go to the ace of diamonds to lead a second club. East takes the ace, and the defense cashes three diamonds, but South wins the heart return, unblocks the queen of clubs and goes to the ace of spades to run the clubs. He has nine tricks.
It looks as if South is living on the edge by spending the ace of diamonds, but if he uses the ace of spades as an entry to lead the second club from dummy, East can win and lead a diamond effectively.
DAILY QUESTION
You hold: S K 9 8 6 H K 10 7 D 8 7 5 C K Q 9. Your partner opens one heart, you respond one spade and he bids 1NT. The opponents pass. What do you say?
ANSWER: All you need to do is bid two hearts. Partner should treat that call as invitational to game, showing 10 or 11 points. You clearly have true heart support, and if you had six to nine points, you would have raised directly to two hearts. A jump to three hearts now would be forcing.
North dealer
Both sides vulnerable
NORTH
S A J 7
H A
D A 6 3 2
C 10 7 6 3 2
WEST
S 5 3 2
H Q 9 8 5 4
D Q 4
C J 8 5
EAST
S Q 10 4
H J 6 3 2
D K J 10 9
C A 4
SOUTH
S K 9 8 6
H K 10 7
D 8 7 5
C K Q 9
North East South West
1 C Pass 1 S Pass
2 S Pass 3 C Pass
3 D Pass 3 NT All Pass
Opening lead — H 5
(C)2020 Tribune Content Agency, LLC.


mercurynews--2020-02-03--Close calls don’t go 49ers way in Super Bowl LIV loss to Kansas City

When examining the 49ers ’ disappointing Super Bowl LIV defeat to the Chiefs on Sunday night through scarlet red and metallic gold glasses , it ’ s easy to see how some crucial calls by officials had an impact on San Francisco ’ s 31-20 loss .
That doesn ’ t mean the calls — or even the non-calls — made the difference between winning or losing in Miami .
The 49ers have no one to blame but themselves for what happened in Miami .
You get outscored 21-0 while blowing a fourth-quarter lead in the Super Bowl , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we will nonetheless point out there were five calls during the game that were close enough where they could have gone the 49ers ’ way and made things even more interesting at Hard Rock Stadium .
At the risk of adding to any nauseating , postgame complaining , here are five controversial plays that didn ’ t go San Francisco ’ s way on Sunday : The 49ers appeared to put themselves into position to at least kick a short field goal and grab a 13-10 halftime lead when George Kittle rumbled down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 42-yard catch .
But , not so fast .
Kittle was flagged for pass interference for using his right hand to keep safety Daniel Sorsensen away from him while the ball was in the air .
Despite 49ers coach Kyle Shanahan ’ s vocal disapproval of the call , he didn ’ t challenge the play , which frankly appeared to be the correct call .
“ The ref made the call and I ’ ve got ta live with it , ” Kittle told reporters afterward .
“ It is what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helmet-to-helmet blow midway through the third quarter on a third-and-5 play but no call was made .
The crown of Chiefs linebacker Ben Niemann ’ s helmet impacted Garoppolo ’ s helmet and seemed to jar the 49ers quarterback .
Not only was there no penalty on the play , but officials also didn ’ t deem the hit severe enough to check on Garoppolo , even though he was on the turf holding his helmet for a moment after the blow .
Had the official ruled the play was flagrant , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at their own 40 .
Could the 49ers ’ have capitalized on the penalty ?
Who knows ?
Damien Williams scored what turned out to be the game-winning touchdown on a 5-yard pass from Patrick Mahomes with 2:44 left in the game , but it was as close a call as possible .
Williams caught the swing pass and stretched the ball inside the pylon on the right sideline while getting shoved out by 49ers cornerback Richard Sherman .
While Williams did step out of bounds , the ball was ruled to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an instant before he stepped out .
Had the scoring play been overturned , the Chiefs would have had a fourth-and-goal play from the 1 with the Super Bowl on the line .
Yet , it ’ s pretty difficult to argue about the touchdown not being overturned .
Was Kansas City defensive tackle Tanoh Kpassagnon offsides on the 49ers ’ third-and-14 play with 9 1/2 minutes left in the game and San Francisco protecting a 20-10 lead ?
Replays would seem to suggest so .
However , no flag was thrown and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Garoppolo scrambled for a couple of yards before being pushed out of bounds .
Best case for the 49ers , they would have gotten another chance on a third-and-9 play — still not a play where a first down is likely , but who knows ?
In retrospect , the 49ers wished they would have been flagged for a delay of game on a failed fourth-down play while trailing 24-20 with 1:25 left in the game .
While replays showed the play clock was at zero an instant before Ben Garland snapped the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrown .
Thus , the 49ers had to accept the consequences of their fourth-and-10 play from midfield — a Garoppolo sack by Kansas City ’ s Frank Clark .
In fairness , FOX analyst Troy Aikman pointed out there are times when a play is allowed to continue even when the play clock reads zero because it can take officials an extra split second to see the play clock wind down and then realize the ball hadn ’ t yet been snapped .
In a best-case scenario for San Francisco , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still would have faced another ferocious Chiefs blitz like the one that just resulted in a sack .

When examining the 49ers’ disappointing Super Bowl LIV defeat to the Chiefs on Sunday night through scarlet red and metallic gold glasses, it’s easy to see how some crucial calls by officials had an impact on San Francisco’s 31-20 loss.
That doesn’t mean the calls — or even the non-calls — made the difference between winning or losing in Miami. The 49ers have no one to blame but themselves for what happened in Miami. You get outscored 21-0 while blowing a fourth-quarter lead in the Super Bowl, then that loss is on you.
But we will nonetheless point out there were five calls during the game that were close enough where they could have gone the 49ers’ way and made things even more interesting at Hard Rock Stadium.
At the risk of adding to any nauseating, postgame complaining, here are five controversial plays that didn’t go San Francisco’s way on Sunday:
George Kittle pass interference
Huge call here. George Kittle flagged for OPI before the half. Thoughts 🧐⬇ #49ers #SBLIV pic.twitter.com/Ch4iL89K1w — OurSF49ers (@OurSf49ers) February 3, 2020
The 49ers appeared to put themselves into position to at least kick a short field goal and grab a 13-10 halftime lead when George Kittle rumbled down inside the Chiefs 20 after hauling in a 42-yard catch. But, not so fast.
Kittle was flagged for pass interference for using his right hand to keep safety Daniel Sorsensen away from him while the ball was in the air. Despite 49ers coach Kyle Shanahan’s vocal disapproval of the call, he didn’t challenge the play, which frankly appeared to be the correct call.
“The ref made the call and I’ve gotta live with it,” Kittle told reporters afterward. “It is what it is.”
Illegal helmet-to-helmet hit on Garoppolo?
Garoppolo should be in concussion protocol. pic.twitter.com/9yQ7aOQIfn — Rudy Gersten (@DCBarno) February 3, 2020
Jimmy Garoppolo absorbed a helmet-to-helmet blow midway through the third quarter on a third-and-5 play but no call was made. The crown of Chiefs linebacker Ben Niemann’s helmet impacted Garoppolo’s helmet and seemed to jar the 49ers quarterback.
Not only was there no penalty on the play, but officials also didn’t deem the hit severe enough to check on Garoppolo, even though he was on the turf holding his helmet for a moment after the blow.
Had the official ruled the play was flagrant, the 49ers would have been a first down at their own 40. Could the 49ers’ have capitalized on the penalty? Who knows?
Did Chiefs’ Damien Williams really score?
The Chiefs are back on top after back-to-back scores at the #SuperBowl pic.twitter.com/yRXiQsxr5M — Sporting News (@sportingnews) February 3, 2020
Damien Williams scored what turned out to be the game-winning touchdown on a 5-yard pass from Patrick Mahomes with 2:44 left in the game, but it was as close a call as possible.
Williams caught the swing pass and stretched the ball inside the pylon on the right sideline while getting shoved out by 49ers cornerback Richard Sherman. While Williams did step out of bounds, the ball was ruled to have broken the plane of the goal line an instant before he stepped out.
Had the scoring play been overturned, the Chiefs would have had a fourth-and-goal play from the 1 with the Super Bowl on the line. Yet, it’s pretty difficult to argue about the touchdown not being overturned.
Would-be offsides on Chiefs
Just saw this. The Chiefs most definitely jumped offsides on this play. Granted it was 3rd and 14 but you never know. pic.twitter.com/th5AXOw0Et — Kyle Seeley (@ItsKyleSeeley) February 3, 2020
Was Kansas City defensive tackle Tanoh Kpassagnon offsides on the 49ers’ third-and-14 play with 9 1/2 minutes left in the game and San Francisco protecting a 20-10 lead? Replays would seem to suggest so.
However, no flag was thrown and the result of the play was Jimmy Garoppolo scrambled for a couple of yards before being pushed out of bounds. Best case for the 49ers, they would have gotten another chance on a third-and-9 play — still not a play where a first down is likely, but who knows?
Late delay of game penalty on 49ers?
In retrospect, the 49ers wished they would have been flagged for a delay of game on a failed fourth-down play while trailing 24-20 with 1:25 left in the game. While replays showed the play clock was at zero an instant before Ben Garland snapped the ball to Garoppolo, no flag was thrown.
Thus, the 49ers had to accept the consequences of their fourth-and-10 play from midfield — a Garoppolo sack by Kansas City’s Frank Clark.
In fairness, FOX analyst Troy Aikman pointed out there are times when a play is allowed to continue even when the play clock reads zero because it can take officials an extra split second to see the play clock wind down and then realize the ball hadn’t yet been snapped.
In a best-case scenario for San Francisco, it would have had a fourth-and-15 play and likely still would have faced another ferocious Chiefs blitz like the one that just resulted in a sack.


mercurynews--2020-02-03--California’s gig-worker law faces push-back, even from some it’s intended to help

Hector Castellanos was on his way to pick up a passenger for Lyft ride-share service in the Bay Area in 2017 when another car slammed into his Toyota Prius .
He needed shoulder surgery and couldn ’ t work for eight months after the accident .
But since drivers for Lyft and many other similar services are independent contractors and not employees , Castellanos didn ’ t have worker ’ s compensation insurance .
With no wages coming in , his daughter had to drop out of college for two semesters to help the family stay afloat .
“ My @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We almost lost our house.
” That ’ s why Castellanos , who is back driving for both Lyft and Uber now , has been rallying for months in support of Assembly Bill 5 — a law that , as of Jan. 1. , makes it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors .
The goal of the bill is to make sure companies aren ’ t using freelancers to save money by skirting labor laws that guarantee protections such as paid sick days , health care benefits , overtime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But AB5 is a far-reaching bill that touches an estimated one million Californians , including many who don ’ t work for big corporations or resent their circumstances .
And in the month since it kicked in , many traditional independent contractors — photographers , musicians , translators and others — have lost work .
What ’ s more , some California companies have looked to out-of-state workers or otherwise shifted gears to avoid running up against AB5 .
Such stories have triggered numerous challenges to the bill , with lawsuits , legislation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exempt categories of workers or repeal the legislation entirely .
Even AB5 ’ s author , Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez , D-San Diego , has introduced place-holder legislation , which she told the Register will help sole proprietors and others navigate the new landscape .
In the meantime , confusion reigns .
Many freelancers say they don ’ t understand how the bill affects them , or how it touches their industries , and they ’ re getting conflicting advice about how to navigate the new law .
Temecula-based band leader Mickie Arnett has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel their livelihoods — and the local music scene — are threatened by AB5 .
Arnett estimates he ’ s spent more than $ 2,000 on attorneys , business permits and other costs .
He ’ s formed a limited partnership with his band mates to ensure he ’ s complying with the law when he pays them after gigs .
He ’ s also told several musicians not to expect bookings this year and , to help cover new costs , he ’ s upped his band ’ s rate .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Andy Doty , who regularly books Arnett ’ s band at his Old Town Blues Club in Temecula , said he ’ s debating whether to increase drink prices or add a cover charge so he can afford to offer live music .
Both options , he knows , could mean a “ death knell ” for his business .
Two workers sued Dynamex courier service after the company opted to shave an estimated 30 % from its labor costs by converting its entire staff into independent contractors .
Dynamex lost the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state Supreme Court bypassed a little-known measure called the “ Borello test , ” which California employers have been supposed to pass for decades to legally classify workers as independent contractors .
Instead , the court established a much stricter “ ABC test.
” To qualify as freelancers , the ABC test says California workers now must : A ) Be “ free from control ” of whoever hired them while they ’ re doing the gig , B ) Be doing something different from the work typically done by the person @ @ @ @ @ @ @ C ) Be doing a gig that ’ s in line with the type of work the person typically does .
It ’ s the “ B ” in the ABC test that ’ s the kicker for most freelancers .
If a band leader pays a musician or a language firm pays an interpreter or a newspaper pays a freelance writer , those jobs are within the employers ’ normal scope of work , so they likely would not pass the ABC test .
Gonzalez , a former labor leader , wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freelance workers into law .
It took effect Jan. 1 , and Gov .
Gavin Newsom included $ 20 million for AB5 enforcement in his proposed 2020-21 budget .
A dozen other states already have similar policies on their books , Gonzalez noted .
But none are as strict as California ’ s law .
Companies in breach of AB5 face fines of $ 5,000 to $ 25,000 per violation .
And they can be forced to cover payroll taxes , overtime pay and other costs retroactively if workers had been properly classified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are no reports of the state punishing employers for violating AB5 .
That ’ s true even as companies such as Uber , Lyft and Postmates , among others , thumb their noses at AB5 .
Many are continuing to list workers as independent contractors as they file a lawsuit and propose a ballot initiative to challenge the bill .
Meanwhile , Glendale attorney Samuel Dordulian said his firm has been getting so many calls each week from companies and workers with questions about AB5 that he can ’ t keep up .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they want to know if there ’ s a way for them to get around the ABC test .
Almost always , he added , the answer is no .
Some two dozen categories of workers — ranging from doctors and lawyers , to manicurists , real estate agents and commercial fishermen — were granted at least partial exemptions from AB5 .
Those workers can use the much-looser Borello test to qualify as independent contractors .
Employment attorney Laura Heckathorn of Los Angeles said it will be up to the state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further define some of the vague exemptions in AB5 , such as who qualifies as “ fine artists ” or what it takes for a gig worker to be his or her own business .
In deciding which categories of workers should be exempt , Gonzalez said her team met with labor groups , studied case law , and looked at industries that had a history of not protecting workers .
Gonzalez said music industry representatives didn ’ t agree on terms before the bill was signed , so changes might still come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Gonzalez doesn ’ t expect any other AB5 exemptions for entire categories of workers .
But other industries and legislators disagree , and continue to push for carve-outs .
For example , in January a judge ruled that federal law , not California ’ s AB5 , should apply as protection for some 70,000 independent truck drivers .
Freelance journalists and photographers also have asked the court to exempt them from AB5 , though a judge shot down that request .
The bill does allow freelance writers and photographers to contribute up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one media outlet before the law kicks in .
But many freelancers routinely pass that number .
And even before AB5 took effect , Vox Media ’ s digital sports media company SB Nation announced it was dropping some 200 freelancers in California due to the new law .
With newspapers already reeling from years of closures and cuts amid declining revenues , State Sen. Pat Bates , R-Laguna Niguel , introduced one bill that would exempt freelance journalists from AB5 .
Another would permanently exempt newspaper carriers , who were granted a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t punish thousands of people because of a bad actor , ” she said , referring to Dynamex .
“ Let ’ s use a scalpel and not a sledgehammer.
” Bates tried in 2019 to repeal AB5 , but her effort failed .
Now a group of Republican Assembly members and Senators have introduced a new bill and a constitutional amendment that would repeal AB5 and reinstate the Borello test , though they face a battle in the Democratic-controlled legislature .
Another bill would exempt independently-owned businesses with fewer than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million in gross revenue over the past three years .
And yet another bill would exempt freelance interpreters and translators .
• Not even coronavirus can stop Tesla ’ s ongoing surge But Bill Glasser , founder of Language World Services in Northern California , hopes AB5 sticks for his industry .
He converted his interpreters from freelance to staff a decade ago , a move that he said cost him money but improved his company ’ s quality .
Glasser said his interpreters are screened and trained before they ’ re sent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , hospitals and other care facilities .
“ I don ’ t think that should be left up to some independent contractor that was found on Craigslist last week , ” he said .
While the quality of workers who adapt to AB5 will likely be solid , Temecula club owner Doty worries about the bill ’ s unintended consequences .
“ I ’ d really hate to see the local music scene deteriorate , evaporate or even lessen as a result of this bill .
”

Hector Castellanos was on his way to pick up a passenger for Lyft ride-share service in the Bay Area in 2017 when another car slammed into his Toyota Prius.
He needed shoulder surgery and couldn’t work for eight months after the accident. But since drivers for Lyft and many other similar services are independent contractors and not employees, Castellanos didn’t have worker’s compensation insurance. With no wages coming in, his daughter had to drop out of college for two semesters to help the family stay afloat.
“My family suffered,” Castellanos said. “We almost lost our house.”
That’s why Castellanos, who is back driving for both Lyft and Uber now, has been rallying for months in support of Assembly Bill 5 — a law that, as of Jan. 1., makes it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors. The goal of the bill is to make sure companies aren’t using freelancers to save money by skirting labor laws that guarantee protections such as paid sick days, health care benefits, overtime pay and the ability to unionize.
But AB5 is a far-reaching bill that touches an estimated one million Californians, including many who don’t work for big corporations or resent their circumstances. And in the month since it kicked in, many traditional independent contractors — photographers, musicians, translators and others — have lost work. What’s more, some California companies have looked to out-of-state workers or otherwise shifted gears to avoid running up against AB5.
Such stories have triggered numerous challenges to the bill, with lawsuits, legislation and a ballot initiative pending that would exempt categories of workers or repeal the legislation entirely. Even AB5’s author, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, has introduced place-holder legislation, which she told the Register will help sole proprietors and others navigate the new landscape.
In the meantime, confusion reigns. Many freelancers say they don’t understand how the bill affects them, or how it touches their industries, and they’re getting conflicting advice about how to navigate the new law.
Temecula-based band leader Mickie Arnett has been meeting recently with fellow musicians who feel their livelihoods — and the local music scene — are threatened by AB5. Arnett estimates he’s spent more than $2,000 on attorneys, business permits and other costs. He’s formed a limited partnership with his band mates to ensure he’s complying with the law when he pays them after gigs. He’s also told several musicians not to expect bookings this year and, to help cover new costs, he’s upped his band’s rate.
Those changes are spreading to other business owners.
Andy Doty, who regularly books Arnett’s band at his Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, said he’s debating whether to increase drink prices or add a cover charge so he can afford to offer live music. Both options, he knows, could mean a “death knell” for his business.
Andy Doty, 59, rhythm guitarist for the Rolling Stones cover band Love You Live, stands outside the Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, Ca., on Friday, January 31st, 2020. Doty, the club’s owner, is personally affected by the California Assembly Bill 5 which forces companies to classify freelancers as employees. This new change has impacted Doty’s ability to perform and book bands, such as The Mickie Arnett Band.(Michael Ares, Contributing Photographer)
Mickie Arnett, 45, (left) plays a guitar alongside Andy Doty, 59, (right) inside the Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, Ca., on Friday, January 31st, 2020. Doty, the club’s owner, is personally affected by the California Assembly Bill 5 which forces companies to classify freelancers as employees. This new change has impacted Doty’s ability to perform and book bands such as The Mickie Arnett Band.(Michael Ares, Contributing Photographer)
Independent contractor Colleen Keene, joined others at a rally in support of a measure to repeal a recently signed law that makes it harder for companies to label workers as independent contractors, in Sacramento, Calif., Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2020. Republican lawmakers Kevin Kiley, of Rocklin, and Melissa Melendez, of Lake Elsinore, have introduced a measure, AB 1928 to immediately repeal AB5 which was approved by the legislature and signed by Gov. Newsom last year. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)
Mickie Arnett, 45, lead singer of The Mickie Arnett Band, stands outside of the Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, Ca., on Friday, January 31st, 2020. Andy Doty, 59, the club’s owner, is personally affected by the California Assembly Bill 5 which forces companies to classify freelancers as employees. This new change has impacted Doty’s ability to perform and book bands such as Arnett’s.(Michael Ares, Contributing Photographer)
Andy Doty, 59, rhythm guitarist for the Rolling Stones cover band Love You Live, stands outside the Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, Ca., on Friday, January 31st, 2020. Doty, the club’s owner, is personally affected by the California Assembly Bill 5 which forces companies to classify freelancers as employees. This new change has impacted Doty’s ability to perform and book bands, such as The Mickie Arnett Band.(Michael Ares, Contributing Photographer)
Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, D-San Diego, speaks in July 2019 at a rally in Sacramento for her AB5 gig worker bill. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)
Mickie Arnett, 45, lead singer of The Mickie Arnett Band, plays guitar inside the Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, Ca., on Friday, January 31st, 2020. Andy Doty, 59, the club’s owner, is personally affected by the California Assembly Bill 5 which forces companies to classify freelancers as employees. This new change has impacted Doty’s ability to perform and book bands, such as Arnett’s.(Michael Ares, Contributing Photographer)
Andy Doty, 59, rhythm guitarist for the Rolling Stones cover band Love You Live, plays guitar inside the Old Town Blues Club in Temecula, Ca., on Friday, January 31st, 2020. Doty, the club’s owner, is personally affected by the California Assembly Bill 5 which forces companies to classify freelancers as employees. This new change has impacted Doty’s ability to perform and book bands, such as Arnett’s.(Michael Ares, Contributing Photographer)
Court decision triggers law
A 2018 California Supreme Court decision launched AB5.
Two workers sued Dynamex courier service after the company opted to shave an estimated 30% from its labor costs by converting its entire staff into independent contractors. Dynamex lost the case. And in its ruling, the state Supreme Court bypassed a little-known measure called the “Borello test,” which California employers have been supposed to pass for decades to legally classify workers as independent contractors. Instead, the court established a much stricter “ABC test.”
To qualify as freelancers, the ABC test says California workers now must: A) Be “free from control” of whoever hired them while they’re doing the gig, B) Be doing something different from the work typically done by the person or company who hired them, and C) Be doing a gig that’s in line with the type of work the person typically does.
It’s the “B” in the ABC test that’s the kicker for most freelancers. If a band leader pays a musician or a language firm pays an interpreter or a newspaper pays a freelance writer, those jobs are within the employers’ normal scope of work, so they likely would not pass the ABC test.
Gonzalez, a former labor leader, wrote AB5 to codify that stricter test for freelance workers into law. It took effect Jan. 1, and Gov. Gavin Newsom included $20 million for AB5 enforcement in his proposed 2020-21 budget.
A dozen other states already have similar policies on their books, Gonzalez noted. But none are as strict as California’s law.
Companies in breach of AB5 face fines of $5,000 to $25,000 per violation. And they can be forced to cover payroll taxes, overtime pay and other costs retroactively if workers had been properly classified as employees.
So far, there are no reports of the state punishing employers for violating AB5.
That’s true even as companies such as Uber, Lyft and Postmates, among others, thumb their noses at AB5. Many are continuing to list workers as independent contractors as they file a lawsuit and propose a ballot initiative to challenge the bill.
Meanwhile, Glendale attorney Samuel Dordulian said his firm has been getting so many calls each week from companies and workers with questions about AB5 that he can’t keep up. Most of the time, he said, they want to know if there’s a way for them to get around the ABC test. Almost always, he added, the answer is no.
More exemptions needed?
Some two dozen categories of workers — ranging from doctors and lawyers, to manicurists, real estate agents and commercial fishermen — were granted at least partial exemptions from AB5. Those workers can use the much-looser Borello test to qualify as independent contractors.
Employment attorney Laura Heckathorn of Los Angeles said it will be up to the state and the courts over the coming years to further define some of the vague exemptions in AB5, such as who qualifies as “fine artists” or what it takes for a gig worker to be his or her own business.
In deciding which categories of workers should be exempt, Gonzalez said her team met with labor groups, studied case law, and looked at industries that had a history of not protecting workers.
Gonzalez said music industry representatives didn’t agree on terms before the bill was signed, so changes might still come for freelancers in that arena. Otherwise, Gonzalez doesn’t expect any other AB5 exemptions for entire categories of workers.
But other industries and legislators disagree, and continue to push for carve-outs.
For example, in January a judge ruled that federal law, not California’s AB5, should apply as protection for some 70,000 independent truck drivers. Freelance journalists and photographers also have asked the court to exempt them from AB5, though a judge shot down that request.
The bill does allow freelance writers and photographers to contribute up to 35 works each year to any one media outlet before the law kicks in. But many freelancers routinely pass that number. And even before AB5 took effect, Vox Media’s digital sports media company SB Nation announced it was dropping some 200 freelancers in California due to the new law.
With newspapers already reeling from years of closures and cuts amid declining revenues, State Sen. Pat Bates, R-Laguna Niguel, introduced one bill that would exempt freelance journalists from AB5. Another would permanently exempt newspaper carriers, who were granted a one-year reprieve under AB5.
“You don’t punish thousands of people because of a bad actor,” she said, referring to Dynamex. “Let’s use a scalpel and not a sledgehammer.”
Bates tried in 2019 to repeal AB5, but her effort failed. Now a group of Republican Assembly members and Senators have introduced a new bill and a constitutional amendment that would repeal AB5 and reinstate the Borello test, though they face a battle in the Democratic-controlled legislature.
Another bill would exempt independently-owned businesses with fewer than 100 employees and less than $15 million in gross revenue over the past three years. And yet another bill would exempt freelance interpreters and translators.
But Bill Glasser, founder of Language World Services in Northern California, hopes AB5 sticks for his industry. He converted his interpreters from freelance to staff a decade ago, a move that he said cost him money but improved his company’s quality. Glasser said his interpreters are screened and trained before they’re sent out to fill language gaps at schools, hospitals and other care facilities.
“I don’t think that should be left up to some independent contractor that was found on Craigslist last week,” he said.
While the quality of workers who adapt to AB5 will likely be solid, Temecula club owner Doty worries about the bill’s unintended consequences.
“I’d really hate to see the local music scene deteriorate, evaporate or even lessen as a result of this bill.”