Listen up you idiots, … (updated 23jul2011)

July 2011
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31

OUR LINKS

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

Listen up you idiots, … (updated 23jul2011)

21 July 2011

George Rebane

[For a translation of the following transcript that’s more suited for polite company, please see the article in the 20jul11 Union.]

…, er, I mean all you good citizens and taxpayers of Nevada County. Since the case is now settled, I’m gonna explain to you how this lawsuit went down, and I’m not gonna say it again, so you better pay attention. Like the Big Man said, he’s “really pleased that this is over with.”

First of all, we never did nothin’ wrong. We said that at the start, and no one has proved otherwise. So we’re saying it again.

Second, we told you at the beginning that we had different views than the plaintiff, that’s the other guy, about what happened, and guess what? Now that it’s over, we still have different views. How ‘bout that?

Third, all parties “agree that there has not been any finding of liability for or against any party.” Mainly because we caved before letting the judge deliver his summary judgment which would have cost us a bundle because then our insurance company probably would have walked. Pretty smart, eh? And that “… against any party” bit? We threw that in to make it look as if some of you would believe that AtPac was also guilty of something here. Oh yeah, and we don’t consider the judge fining us $22K for scrubbing evidence off of our server as a ‘liability’, that was just what we call strategic chump change in the scheme of things – you know what I mean?

Fourth, like I told the Supes, “The parties acknowledge that the matter is being settled solely to avoid further litigation and other costs of going to trial.” And well, maybe also those who might get to read the depositions if it all came out in court. For you people unfamiliar with lawsuits and legal stuff, other ‘matters’ like this are usually settled on the basis of the weather on the trial date, or in what color cars the parties arrived at the court house – you know, things like that.

Now that it’s over, and no one’s guilty of nothin’, and we ducked the big enchilada, and the records are sealed up tighter than a …, never mind; I hope that it's all cleared up in everyone’s head, and that we won’t have to put up with any of this Freedom of Information crap when we tell you to go pound sand. Capiche?

Dismissed!

[22jul2011 update] It appears that The Union has now filed its FOIA for the information pertinent to the case and is off and running on demanding an explanation of who did what when (more here). Note that county counsel is continuing the lamer-than-ever cover-up with the statement that they don't have the Greg Diaz deposition, it's down in the Sacramento offices of their law firm. Well, how about someone getting their butt in the car, driving down there and getting it?

You'd think that at least a copy of such a seminal, important, and revealing peace of testimony would be ensconced and studied in the Rood Center. Nah, that would only happen if they were planning on doing some remediation so that in the future more millions don't go pouring out the door. The beat goes on.

[23jul2011 update] Stan Meckler, president of the NC Tea Party Patriots (of which I am a member), writes a related article in today's Union. And Barry Pruett on Inside Nevada County Politics adds more first person contacts with the Nevada County principals in this case.

Posted in Culture Comments, Current Affairs, Happenings, Nevada County

35 responses to “Listen up you idiots, … (updated 23jul2011)”

Barry Pruett

21 July 2011

This whole thing from my persepective has been about telling the truth and obeying the law. This was not about politics, it was about serving the public faithfully and honestly. Blowing the whistle on Diaz and the County about their wrongful and illegal conduct was difficult for our family. I took a lot of heat for speaking out so publicly against Diaz and the County. My goal in 2010 was not as much to win an election as to make sure the public knew the kind of serious misconduct in which Greg Diaz and the County have been engaged. Between the original wrongful acts of giving the illegal source code access, then coupounding that by hiding and willfully destroying relevant evidence…I think that whole thing is becoming extraordinarily clear now to the public.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

21 July 2011

But sir, if “no one’s is guilty of nothin.” how come taxpayers end up spending so much money trying to prevent us from finding our what really happened, after all if there is no guilty parties why not come clean with the details? Oh!

LikeLike
george

21 July 2011

what is this insurance lumpy carpet that now hides the $2.9 mil?
Is this a catchall for the member agencies? Out of sight; out of mind?

LikeLike
bill tozer

21 July 2011

Yep, and Casey Anthony is guilty of nuthin as well. Leave em all alone and get a life, you rubberneckers. Dr. Rebane, I love it when you speak my language.

LikeLike
Steve Enos

21 July 2011

Seems George is not liking the 4-1 conservative, “R” board of Supervisors.
So what “party” is in chanrge of the BOS and how long have they held control?

LikeLike
Barry Pruett

21 July 2011

This is not about politics, it is about serving the public faithfully and honestly. It does not appear that George is referring to the BOS…but referring to County Counsel. Enos…your partisanship is clouding your reading skills.

LikeLike
Chuck Whitten

21 July 2011

I’d say the fact that the Conservative folks on this blog are willing to attack a board that is 80% Republican is a pretty sure indication that this issue is not about politics or ideology. It’s about a serious problem in local government . . . regardless of politics. There are some pretty serious indications that the county could have settled with AtPac for a whole lot less than $1-million when this thing began, but someone apparently advised the board that the charges were false, and the battle was joined. Anyone who has taken an even cursory look at the depositions knows there were plenty of lies, and a substantial attempt to cover this mess up. At least one (and probably more) county employee was forced to admit lying during that employee’s deposition. Why were the lies necessary if there was nothing to hide? No, this goes well beyond partisan politics. This is about something very, very serious. I won’t goes as far as calling it corruption, however I do believe board members were less than diligent in finding the truth of the matter. I fear that there is at least incompetence somewhere, perhaps worse. The Union’s Jeff Ackerman is apparently planning on filing a Freedom of Information Act request, however it’s very important to realize that local newspapers in Bell did that for many months with no success. It was only when the powerful L.A. Times made the FOIA request that the city felt compelled to comply. I sincerely hope that the county will comply with Ackerman’s FOIA request. Governments at all levels repeatedly brag of their “transparency,” including Nevada County. It’s time for the board to raise the lead curtain, and be truly transparent.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

21 July 2011

Steve Enos,
It is only the Democrats that give passes to wrong doers based on political party. I could care less about the political party of our political leadership at the Rood Center. I want competent open management and we are not getting it. There is something being covered up at the Rood Center and the public deserves to know what it is.

LikeLike
stevenfrisch

22 July 2011

” It is only Democrats that give passes to wrong doers based n political party”. Even you Russ must see the irrationality of a statement like this.
Perhaps if the people making the claim we not so boldly partisan in their objectives, and did not have electoral and financial interest in the outcome, they could have been more successful building a coalition across the partisan divide to demand openness and transparency.
If you all were so dedicated to your Tea Party values, and truly believed there was corruption here, you would be running a recall against the BOS right now. Instead I suspect you will save your electoral thunder to support at least 2-3 of them for another term, while teaming up on Terry Lamphier because he’s left handed.

LikeLike
Barry Pruett

22 July 2011

Steve: Let’s be clear. The BOS did a good job a cleaning up the mess created by Diaz. The county is really run like a corporation. The BOS is the board of directors, and the CEO and the other elected officials run the day-to-day operations. This mess was created by Diaz and exacerbated by county staff…and Diaz and county staff left this mess at the feet of the BOS for them to cleanup.
This whole thing is about serving the public honestly and faithfully and obeying the law. I strongly suspect that Diaz’ deposition will demonstrate such failure to abide by the law. For you to think for a second that this is “partisan” demonstrates your bias.
I heard a rumor that AP may pick up this story. I suppose thast AP’s story will be right down the middle.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

22 July 2011

In the Union this morning: First settlement offer in AtPac case $30,000
Nevada County paid $1.9 million in a lawsuit settlement this week, nearly $1 million more than a settlement offered earlier in the case. County officials maintained Thursday that nothing had changed between the offer and the final settlement, other than the hundreds of thousands racked up in legal fees.
ooo
“Around that time, we were making changes and adding to (the contract) at the board meetings,” Scofield said.
“The cost was becoming very difficult for us to swallow as a board. It really became a business decision.”

How come it took so long to come to this decision?

LikeLike
Barry Pruett

22 July 2011

“AtPac offered the settlement in September 2010, said County Board of Supervisors Chair Ed Scofield. “‘At that time there was no indication the county had done anything wrong,’ Scofield said. ‘The $1 million seemed very extreme and the defense cost was minimal at that time.’” – The Union.
This statement tends to show that County Counsel is spinning the story or flat out lying. The comment presupposes that somebody discovered that somebody had done something wrong. Like I said, Diaz’ deposition would likely shed some light on this mess.

LikeLike
Steve Frisch

22 July 2011

I guess it is ridiculous Barry for me to think that since you were an attorney for Atpac early in this case and clearly must have counseled or supported filing the suit, and the timing of the news releases and disclosures of information benefitted your ill fated campaign for the office that Mr. Diaz’s holds, and since you used the case as an issue in that campaign, and that during that campaign you attempted to paint Mr Diaz as a liberal outsider with “San Francisco values”, and since our Congressman, who is your spouses employer, weighed in in a rather unprecedented way on a non-partisan race calling Mr. Diaz a liberal, and since inside information leaked periodically during the case to partisan sources, that this case could have in any way been partisan.
How foolish of me.
If the BOS is the CEO who is ultimately responsible for deciding to defend this case? Who decided that staff and the other electeds had done nothing wrong and should not be exposes and punished, but protected by their decisions?
The BOS did. That’s were the buck stops.
So I repeat my question: since the pitchfork carrying mob over here is so certain that the BOS protected wrongdoing and corruption, why don’t your Tea Party principles call for all ya’all to lead a recall? Will you be supporting the current members of the BOS who are up for re-election or will you be fielding your own set of Kool-aid drinking candidates?

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

22 July 2011

Regardless of who in government kames the decision, the crap always flows uphill. So, having been there and done that as a Supervisor, I have great sympathy for the BOS. Yep, I am biased. Give them a break.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

22 July 2011

makes

LikeLike
stevenfrisch

22 July 2011

Come on guys, all talk and no Steele in your backbone. If you really think the BOS acted improperly, which you are saying over and over again here, why don’t you stand up for it?
Is it perhaps because Tea is not a set of principles, but rather a partisan political charade designed to seize and hold power?

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

22 July 2011

Tea is freedom. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

LikeLike
Douglas Keachie

22 July 2011

Tea is freedom. Cool! here’s a rambling rant I posted over at Jeff’s. I like it so much, I’ll do it here too. Enjoy!
The subject was originally CABPRO.
I will confess to being addicted to the B&C nuts and bolts aisle. For the specialty items on the wall, they beat out Home Depot every time. I used a more convenient Fox Hardware in Marysville the other day, until I noticed Wonderboard at $19.95 a sheet when it was at $7.95 in HD.
I think kids in high school need a special course that covers what owners of businesses like B&C pass on down to their kids, about the art of doing business. Let’s start with automotive businesses where the journeymen make at most $30/hour when the bossman charges $90/hour. Then move on to the business that is “always broke, no money for higher salaries, don’t pay myself nuthin more than I pay you” but the owner’s equity in the building and inventory increases every month.
This stuff is well hid for the self interests of those who own those businesses, and will never be taught in schools, much as the lawyers in the legislatures will never tax the legal settlements earned by using the court systems, for the support of those systems. Guess who gains the most when the courtrooms are full and a lawyer has 5 clients cooling their heels at the same time, while he collect $180/hour from each of them? Lawyers as a class have no interest in speedy and well funded court systems. No wonder they control the legislatures, as an occupation, more than any other group. There ought to be a law eliminating such one-sidedness, occupationally, in the legislatures.
Lawyers, however, are as dependent on the court system for income as the truckers who pay gasoline taxes for the building and maintenance of the interstates and roads. Nobody complains about “double taxation” there, now do they? But every lawyer I’ve talked to about this, goes for that gun immediately.
END OF RAMBLING RANT..

LikeLike
George Rebane

22 July 2011

SteveF, unless you’re missing the point here, the only thing being called for is a look at what went on at the Rood Center that caused this to become a $2.5+ million monster. The plausible conclusion from the observables is incompetence at a minimum. But then again, nothing like that may have happened, and it could all be explained away as an unfortunate sequence of otherwise prudent actions. As I and the commenters here have maintained, there is no longer any purpose for withholding the facts from taxpayers. The county will not be harmed through the release of any such informaton; only the incompetent and culpable might, if that is the case.
But in any event, the first step is to look at the facts.

LikeLike
Douglas Keachie

22 July 2011

Here’s one for Greg, from the Economist;
“The most annoying Americanism is “a million and a half” when it is clearly one and a half million! A million and a half is 1,000,000.5 where one and a half million is 1,500,000. By that logic, could “one and a half million” not be 1 + 500,000, or 500,001?”

LikeLike
Chuck Whitten

22 July 2011

The term “transparency” has become a tedious cliche as far as I’m concerned, however, I’d like to know the whole truth in this fiasco. It appears the county has complete control over the documents involved in the AtPac lawsuit. Why are any of those documents being kept from the people? If there is anything indicating someone within county government has behaved improperly, or has displayed incompetence, the public should be informed of that. If the behavior or incompetence are attributed to the board members, so be it. As to a recall; the possibility has been under discussion for months, and remains part of the mix.
A question has been running through my mind that someone may be able answer: The settlement calls for $1.9 million to be paid to AtPac and its attorneys, however, as far as I can see, there’s no mention of how the fees for Cypress may have been paid. Was that $775-thousand paid separately, and, if so, how much did the county pay, and how much did the insurance provider pay? I may well have missed something somewhere, but I don’t know the answer at this point. Does anyone else?

LikeLike
Chuck Whitten

22 July 2011

Way to go to The Union and Jeff Ackerman for filing the FOIA! That’s an extremely courageous move. Thanks.

LikeLike
Douglas Keachie

22 July 2011

I think we can count on Norway’s oil is support of the War on Terrorism.

LikeLike
Greg Goodknight

22 July 2011

Keach, why don’t you get your own blog to share your little observations about life? Oh, that’s right, you do, but no one joins in. Imagine that.
While Frisch and company try to prod the usual suspects, I’m happy to join in the chorus wanting some transparency; Ackerman’s FOIA is a good place to start.

LikeLike
Scott Obermuller

22 July 2011

Douglas Keachie – great little rant – I agree with your observations about the legal system although you didn’t go nearly far enough. Just remember – that ‘s the libs you are complaining about, not the T.P. Now the part about the “the art of doing business” Yes – I whole heartedly agree. It should be taught in high school. You would do well to be the first student. Your idea of how a business works, is like most Americans, completely messed up. I’m not sure what you mean by “automotive businesses” but since you said 90 an hour, I’ll assume it’s auto repair. The hourly cost to the employer for a competent tech (mechanic) is so far beyond 30 an hour it isn’t funny. Where in the world do you get that figure? Do you have any clue in the world what it costs to set up a modern auto repair business? I loved the part about how the owners equity in the building and inventory increases every month. This is a typical teachable moment here. One thing that separates the left and the right is the right has a good understanding of the costs of running a business and the increasing load of nonsense and regulation that the govt spits out every year that has to be absorbed or passed along to the public. The only “secret” that most business owners pass along to their children is: “Don’t bother, it’s not worth the grief”.

LikeLike
Douglas Keachie

22 July 2011

And so, Scott, I’m sure they all rush out and become public school teachers and public employees, as those career paths are so much more lucrative….

LikeLike
John Galt

22 July 2011

Steve, how’s your progress on economic development in our community?
I ask because:
A) You spend a great deal of time on these blogs, and
B) Your exhibited memory retention and critical thinking gives me pause.
* Barry Pruett was retained by AtPac long before he became a candidate.
* AtPac retained Pruett to protect their business and intellectual property.
* As Pruett rendered his services for AtPac he came to see Diaz’s incompetency (And people who have spent time around Diaz at the Rood center report his inexperience and sluggish thinking.)
* Diaz’s past revealed alarming events surrounding his tenure in the San Francisco County Clerk/Recorder’s office.
So to answer your question —Yes, it is ridiculous of you to ascribe a predominate partisan motive to Pruett’s campaign or to his commentary on Diaz’s Debacle.
Having an attorney as Clerk/Recorder would have served the County well.
Regarding The BOS: I hear the glee that you and Mr. Enos have over the criticisms of the BOS. But you and your comrades can stop drooling in your Kool-aid, we have no intention of replacing Supervisors who’s biggest fault is trusting statements and counsel of Diaz, Jamison, Haffe, and Monaghan.

LikeLike
Russ Steele

23 July 2011

A new blog has popped up called Travelers Clinic by Shrink who writes:
Union’s AtPac FOIA Futile
With regard to the filling of an FOIA by The Union concerning the AtPac issue I would like to share some thoughts with you.
I did little investigation on this a few weeks ago when there was discussion on the blogs about culpability and leadership. This investigation started with me paying a visit to the Clerk of the Board. When asking if any tapes or other records where taken during closed session I was told that no tapes were made nor were any minutes taken. I was told by the Clerk that she only took notes when there was an action taken. The Clerk told me everything was done according to The Brown Act. I was advised to refer to The Brown Act to determine what procedures would be followed with regard to records. Having previously been subject to the restraints of this law, but not with regard to closed session, I did investigate what The Brown Act requires and restricts in closed session.
ooo
The bottom line here is, I don’t think The Union will be getting very far with their FOIA request. In fact, because The Brown Act makes it a crime for anyone with knowledge about proceedings in closed session to disclose information about those closed sessions The Brown Act will prohibit the public from being given the information they need to ascertain the performance and integrity of their elected officials.
I guess the only recourse will be to hold them ALL responsible. This isn’t inappropriate or uncalled for when you consider that if there had been even ONE Leader in the group to start with, he, or she, would have stood up, removed himself, or herself, from what was going on and therefore but an end to the madness.
I think the Shrink may have missed the point. I do not think that the Diaz deposition is protected by the Brown Act, it is a Court document. This is the document that the Union is really looking for. Once that deposition was on record the County got real interested in settling.

LikeLike
George Rebane

23 July 2011

Thanks Russ, and, of course, you are right on about the Diaz deposition which has nothing to do with the Brown Act. Although there are executive (closed) sessions of the BoS connected to this case in which they did take actions to approve strategy and legal fees pursuant to getting briefings by county management staff and county counsel.

LikeLike
Bonnie M

23 July 2011

We’ll be looking forward to reading what the Union finds out. Knowing the truth is constructive.

LikeLike
stevenfrisch

23 July 2011

What makes you think The Union is synonymous with the truth?

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

23 July 2011

Because they are truthful. Leftwingnuts ranters from Truckee don’t.

LikeLike
John Galt

23 July 2011

There’s a big difference between a deposition and the application of the Brown Act for closed sessions.
The deposition occurred neither in the Supervisors, nor during closed session.
Furthermore, other depositions on this case have been released.
It will be very telling if the Supervisors continue to protect Diaz after the debacle he created.

LikeLike
Chuck Whitten

24 July 2011

It would be interesting to know the results of votes by the members of the Board of Supervisors during the closed sessions concerning AtPac’s litigation. I’m not clear whether all of those votes are available, or only the final vote on the settlement. I imagine the final vote was unanimous, however, I’d like to know who was opposing the majority, if anyone, during the closed sessions It’s my understanding that discussions between board members and attorneys is not available, but the votes may be. I agree with John Galt on the availability of the Diaz deposition.

LikeLike
Douglas Keachie

26 July 2011

“Because they are truthful. Leftwingnuts ranters from Truckee don’t.” Todd, slouching towards Cobert’s “truthiness.”

LikeLike