This post1 is in reference to claim against the American Bar Association in regard to the intellectual property trade named Combolisk and the profession of sign maker of Michael Leigh Macgowan in the tradition of Paul Revere.
I grew up in the billboard industry and became a sole proprietor under the trade name Read Ink. I sold my assets in 2000. My wife at the time ran off with half the money and I spent the other half trying to keep the family together. Meanwhile the digital technology revolutionized the outdoor advertising industry. I realized that the display face changing like a computer screen meant skilled artistry and equipment [expense] were no longer necessary to separate billboards and their commercial category from on premise signs used to identify businesses to travelers. They became truly speech structures.
I always believed the billboard was a means of speech and that it was wrongly regulated due to the advertising capability in commerce. An important precedent established that no community can remove all billboards because they are a means for free speech for at least the nonprofit community [Metromedia v San Diego]. Removing all billboard use is a barrier to nonprofit free speech and unconstitutional. A second more recent precedent established that the value used to justify control of signs must be maintained in the application of code. So when a church was denied time and place for display of their sign [Reed v Gilbert] during prohibited times, the court held the value could not be proven. So a nonprofit structure can not be prevented and commercial use between nonprofit broadcasts became a test to put the two precedents together.
So I came up with and filed for a new trade name called the Combolisk not unlike the bus benches and bus shelters and highway logos that the government service providers use to circumvent the beautification laws in favor of government profit. Combolisk combines the term community with the Greek Obelisk as a broadcast structure used before zoning and inherent like a cave painting to the land. Based on the Godly principle of tithe, the digital broadcast structure exists by the nonprofit precedent first use preventing total restriction and then displays up to five sponsor broadcasts rotated twice before another nonprofit message. This fulfills the inability to restrict the commercial content between nonprofit messages. How do you take down a structure during nonprofit use. And how does the payment of broadcast revenue to the sign maker affect the ability to build, maintain and broadcast the nonprofit messages that are free and part of the trade name use?
I secured an agreement to build a Combolisk in Castle Rock. This municipal incorporation has a prohibitive ordinance which is already unconstitutional. They didn’t really know how to handle my request as their building applications do not have a check box for illegal use as a prohibited billboard. I met with City Council and told them of my request. They provided no remedy. I was forced to proceed with an application down this path to exhaust due process. I was forced down the path to variance for size and height code restrictions that are normal differences between the one word on premise type signs vs. the three to five word and picture standard format for larger off-premise billboards. All the variances were denied. I filed in STATE OF COLORADO District Court. The opposing attorney moved the case to Federal Court because the only issues were constitutional. I lost because the city did not deny me off premise copy. I did not claim in their code where off -premise use was illegal. Since the issue of free speech was never denied, the First Amendment use of content was not under purview of the court as I had not been denied under the off-premise code even though I had asked to be denied. This was stupid because the size restriction meant that it would be a hindrance to travelers using the car wash on site without being sixteen foot from the bottom. So the value of safety wasn’t even considered.
I appealed to the Court of Appeals during the onset of CoVid. Although the opposing attorney was given extension to file during the whole process to go on planned vacation, and the court website indicates you can get a one time extension, I was denied. They did not serve me with the denial and closed the case. Since the lower court had taken over five months to respond and work on their schedule, I finally called and found out that the time to appeal had expired and the case was closed without Notice.
I decided to start a new application as the original had been a variance to an on premise sign which wasn’t a First Amendment issue and that due process was exhausted. I wanted to directly address the prohibitive billboard ordinance even though I asked for one specifically on the first application but was never denied. The building department told me to fill out an application. I explained there was no application for an illegal use. I appealed to the Mayor who just ignored me. I filed in Federal District Court and was denied. There were some issues but ultimately they decided that the issues were too similar and that I couldn’t file a second case. I filed an appeal and somewhere started studying Anna and became a Colorado State National.
I made claim the Court of Appeals had no jurisdiction and they upheld the lower court. I Noticed the court of my change in political status. I had claimed two million four hundred thousand dollars for loss of use based on the expected revenue from when I first applied to when I became a national. The whole process took so long that the landowner indicated he would not sign a trade agreement for me to operate outside the city limits on the actual land below the MUNICIPAL fiction.
I file claim via the Sign in America program for remedy for the complete failure of the American Bar Assoiciation attorneys and judges to follow any likeness to their own precedents and law let alone my Constitutional rights to free speech and due process. I claim my right to profession and income as an outdoor sign maker and the lost revenue for loss of use that will be used to carry on the tradition of the Combolisk project. This and the project can be found at Combolisk.org.
Currently the Combolisk project is more of a public Notice board to bring forward claim. In trying to find new locations for Combolisks, we have discovered much fraud by the original Union Pacific Railway Company. My wife and I have filed for trade name use as Union Pacific Railway Company to recover abandoned property and land granted by the defacto. Although the railroad was part of delegated services, some land patents were not granted to the original company until after it went bankrupt and a new Union Pacific Railroad Corporation emerged with some of the assets. The new UP specifically disclaimed rights to a sale of land to Rufus Clark. The Rufus Clark Sections in Arapahoe County were sold by fraud. The former UP did not own them when they sold them. Fraud vitiates everything it touches as international maxim in LAW. The UP DISCLAIMER, Land Patents from the BLM and our claims cannot coexist in time. We have been in the process of bringing this fraud forward. In addition, we have claimed land patent status for our land and plan to start Noticing local churches of their contracts with Satan and the fraud by the defacto. We plan to publish this as a public service to others on the Combolisk.org site.
Witnesseth as truth this 12/10/23:
By:_______________________
michael leigh macgowan[©]
1See Combolisk Project at Combolisk.org
