Rebane's Ruminations
June 2011
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

My email has been running torrid over the last day or so with everyone telling me, and everyone else, about the Sac Bee article on ‘hard money’ lending shenanigans in the state, and especially in Nevada County.  “NC Clerk/Recorder Diaz has company regarding questionable dealings while in office.” is a typical message line in those viral emails.

Please, dear readers, let’s not let this latest hot flash confuse or dilute our limited attention spans with what is going on in the AtPac lawsuit.  The hard money lending businesses recently rife in the county, that the Sac Bee says implicates our DA Cliff Newell, is a horse of a significantly different color.  One involves our highest elected officials in an arguable screw-up that brings to question their competence, the other involves alleged criminality in private business dealings that smell to high heaven of fraud (with the added allegation that certain people received “favorable treatment” from the DA’s office).

The AtPac case also has immediacy.  The folks at the Rood Center, our vaunted leadership and defendants in the lawsuit, are into a period of critical strategizing and negotiations with the plaintiff that can spell loss of more good money after the bad money already committed and spent.  And as we have seen from the available evidence, these guys have yet to demonstrate the sterling quality of the their decision making capability.  They tacitly corroborate this assessment by having nurtured this ‘nuisance suit’ into a nightmare while trying to keep a lid on the whole thing.

Meanwhile, the NC hard money caper is still under investigation by everyone from our local constabulary through Sacramento to the feds.  Sac Bee has yet to drop the other shoe in their two-part investigative reporting on the matter.  I think it’s too early to get our undies in a bundle on this one, especially since they already have a couple of good twists in them over the lawsuit that promises to cost us taxpayers some serious bucks before it is settled.  No one has yet provided a hint of a connection between AtPac and hard money.  In my view, job one here is to first gain enough information about the AtPac suit so that we can evaluate the people we elect to govern us.

[6jun2011 update]  The SacBee dropped the other shoe today as reported by Russ Steele on NCMW.  In its second of two articles the newspaper spells out some of the gory details of hard money lending that have gone down in Nevada County.  The attendant graphics in the article help make sense of some complicated stuff and highlight the cast of characters involved.  There is no indication yet of new evidence that would incriminate our DA Cliff Newell.  The Union covers this aspect here.

[14jun2011 update]  The county will enter mediation on the AtPac case on 21 June 2011.  Clerk-Recorder Greg Diaz gave his deposition on 27 May.  In this deposition Mr Diaz gave testimony from his perspective on the events germain to this lawsuit that would presumably identify the who/when of giving Aptitude Solutions access to AtPac software, and the subsequent scrubbing of the county records server.  It appears that the county does not want Mr Diaz's deposition to see the light of day.

Posted in , ,

62 responses to “Competence vs Criminality in Nevada County (updated 14jun2011)”

  1. Bob W Avatar
    Bob W

    J Cutter- I am very curious to know that If Mr. Pruett had anything to do with “pushing toward that costly litigation”, as you seem to imply should be considered, who then would you hold responsible? And if that is not Mr. Pruett how then is he relevant?

    Like

  2. J Cutter Avatar
    J Cutter

    Russ,
    The courts will decide the intellectual property case, and I hope that they rule to my layman sensibilities that the only way to truly infringe upon one’s property is to adopt and implement specific stolen code into your product. That merely, potentially, reading said code is not infringement. (I can ‘read’ Microsoft Word code/routine, but what harm is done if I don’t use it?) Plus, let’s be honest, Aptitude appears to be head & shoulders beyond AtPac/CRiis in terms of market share, due in large part to the innovations they present, and particularly after Mr Maclam’s death, per my research. But then, I am hoping for a win by ‘our’/the people’s side.
    As to Pruett’s involvement, I beg to differ – in that a Client’s action is generally propelled by the advice of counsel. This whole thing may not have been advanced if not for that advice, and the motivation behind that advice is relevant.
    If Diaz did wrong, then surely the court will judge so after all this effort (or even the Grand Jury), and he should be punished.
    If the BOS has mismanaged the situation then they too should pay in some form – but we are not privy to their counsel either.
    Again, I am just curious the motivations, as the results are costly. For all I know Pruett is as noble as all here seem to present, and that the clients in all cases are steamrolling (which is possible), but someone needs to ask the questions. He is ‘out’ of the situation in terms of liability I believe, beyond that of reputation/credibility (in a manner similar to which it took a hit back in IN with some parties to the Plasmatronics matter).

    Like

  3. Russ Steele Avatar

    J Cutter,
    The courts have already decided that the County failed to produce requested evidence and fined them $20,000 and that they had scrubbed a disk that was considered evidence, and will in struct the jury to consider this in their deliberation. The question is did Aptitude use the AtPac code to extract the data. If they did, then they violated the copy write, just like you making a bootleg copy of Word or Excel and using it.
    I was wondering, have you read any of the depositions? They are lengthy and repetitive, but critical evidence that were was some wrong doing was going on, not we just need to know under what authority was this wrong doing authorized.

    Like

  4. Mike Thornton Avatar

    George, if as you say, you’ll be “the first to congratulate the Supes” if things turn out well for the County and that possibility still remains, then isn’t all thing hand wringing and chest thumping about all the incompetence at the Rood Center (regarding AtPac) just a little bit premature? And isn’t at least curious, that the people who are beating that drum the most, Barry’s friends and political allies?

    Like

  5. Mike Thornton Avatar

    And for Paul Emery:
    Paul as you know I was privy to a lot of information about the Hastert case and the very real possibility of conflict of interest on the part of the DA. This included real questions about whether or not he was “dragging his feet” on the matter because of his own deep involvement with the “hard money” community in Nevada County. Anybody (including Jeff Pelline) who tries to blow off an investigation or to suggest that looking into Newell regarding these matter is a “right wing smear campaign” is BS!
    I know Cliff and I like Cliff, but the fact of the matter is that there is enough suspicion to warrant a through investigation!

    Like

  6. J Cutter Avatar
    J Cutter

    Russ –
    Actually, I have read most of it. Though, again, I am not even attempting to judge the case in advance of the court, as you seem to have done.
    I found this analysis very insightful as to the sanction imposed:
    http://www.josephnyc.com/blog/?blogID=1694
    Further, I read the transition situation differently – in a nutshell, I believe as a Client that I have a right to my data, and termination of the previous provider should not involve what amounts to a ransoming of that data by said provider for ‘extraction’ – unless, of course, that extraction fee is prescribed in the contract, which I have yet to see.
    I must admit that I also have more inherent faith in those I hire/elect to represent my interests, and was raised to give the benefit of doubt to those same until proven unworthy. So that does reflect in my view of this situation. Also, I did not hire AtPac but Diaz, and yet would have questioned his continued use of AtPac, based upon the bit of research I’ve done now (Mr. Maclam’s passing and the corporate flux at about this same juncture would have played a role, as well just the technical).

    Like

  7. Paul Emery Avatar
    Paul Emery

    Todd Juvinal quote
    “We on the right do not condemn someone or pre-judge until all the facts are in.”
    Thanks for setting the standards for conservative dialogue. I’ll keep this in my hip pocket if the question should arise.

    Like

  8. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    Glad to hear you will follow my lead and maintain some ethics. Good call Paul.

    Like

  9. Ben Emery Avatar

    Thanks Paul for letting Mr. Newell have his opinion put out into the discussion. I don’t know Mr. Newell but have met him a few times. Only time will tell whether there is something more here or not. On the surface and a fan of the idea innocent until proven guilty I will give Mr. Newell the benefit of the doubt.

    Like

  10. George Rebane Avatar

    Given the early evidence about the county’s dealings with AtPac (starting with the RFP), there is a plausible and compelling interpretation of publicly available information that the county realized early on that it had screwed up, and then started spending money on lawyers to defend their decision not to pay AtPac a $15K pittance for a standard data format conversion job. More mistakes apparently followed. The only goal now is to attempt to minimize further loss of funds, and it is not clear that this goal is shared by the county.
    In conversations with lawyers knowledgeable in these matters, one thing is clear – the taxpayer/voter interests are NOT represented in these dealings. We have no one sitting at the table arguing our brief.

    Like

  11. Mike Thornton Avatar

    “We have no one sitting at the table arguing our brief”
    What would that “brief” be, George?
    Ask Nick and Amanda Wilcox, what the County of Nevada is willing to do to keep from paying out money on a lawsuit!

    Like

  12. Mike Thornton Avatar

    Wow, I thought this was the most crucial issue in the entire world!
    Seems like maybe not so much anymore!

    Like

Leave a comment