Anti marijuana Kent Sawatsky to fund a lawsuit for HUMMAP? Woods and Sawatsky Humboldt County's latest odd couple?

Public watch dog Kent Sawatsky has threatened action before before against Judge Bruce Watson but no follow through.

In the past, he has been very vocal about being anti cannabis, particularly chewing out the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors for the Medical Marijuana Land Use Ordinance.

These are just two quotes from two of my posts:

"We currently have the highest capita of criminals in U.S. with crimes such as tax evasion and money laundering": Kent Sawatsky

"Weed greed and children do not mix" : Kent Sawatsky

Mr. Sawatsky is willing to fund a lawsuit but has to become a member of HUMMAP and allegedly he wants his involvement kept quiet until this is official.

Except his potential plan hit a hitch.

Not all HUMMAP members are thrilled with this potential alliance.

These are emails from some of the HUMMAP members. I have removed their email addresses.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Christopher Larson wrote:

IF KENT SAWATSKY BECOMES A MEMBER I WISH TO RESIGN. THIS IS NOT A HEALTHY ALLIANCE. Sorry my key stuck. Also i don’t think it’s right that Woods alone sees all members responses, effectively giving him censorship and resulting in a very strange organization. I’ve enjoyed working with most of you and hope to continue to do so, but I’m no longer comfortable with being represented as a HUMMAP member.

Best regards,
Cristo Larson

> On Feb 11, 2016, at 11:34 AM, Robert Sutherland wrote:
>
> Colleagues,
>
> Today I am printing out and signing the contract with Rachel Doughty, to continue research on the ordinance issue. Most of you who replied are in support of this action. I will mail it to her tomorrow morning.
>
> The agreement is between Hummap and Doughty and me and Doughty. In order for the funder, Kent Sawatzky, to be included within the attorney-client privilege, he must be a member of Hummap. I therefore am here soliciting any objections to his membership. Respond quickly because he is awaiting word from me on this before he mails his check to Rachel. Hummap has no real standards for "membership" that I am aware of. My way of treating it has been to include anyone who is not fundamentally opposed to our vision statement, which I try to distribute freely. Not all of them have attended Hummap meetings, though that helps. Kent does not want his membership to be high profile, so please respect his wishes. He has already met with some of you.
>
> Also, I request that if any of you who have had any of the following info about the ordinance at any point to provide details to me for Rachel:
> 1. Any mention of baseline.
> 2. Contact with Steve Lazar or the attorneys and staff about the ordinance.
>
> Best regards, Woods.

Mr. Sawatsky called me back. Regarding Judge Watson, he said that the Judge resigned in December. He wanted to bring some issues to the public's attention about Judge Watson's alleged improprieties.

"I have funded the investigation of a lawsuit," said Mr. Sawatsky. "My concern is that the environment is not being protected under the mitigated negative declaration. For us to protect the environment, it may be necessary for me to join the organization."

At this point Mr. Sawatsky said he is just "exploring this and has no intention of anticipated legislation."

I am waiting to hear from Woods.