Monday, February 18, 2008

In this week's McKinleyville Press...

Falor accuses county of Grand Jury meddling,
an article by Daniel Mintz.

excerpt: One of the thorniest situations in county government has gotten more so, as former County Counsel Tamara Falor is alleging that Grand Jury investigations into her resignation and $289,000 damage claim settlement have been manipulated by county employees and officials.

...The crux of Falor's claim is that a June 2007 Grand Jury report on its investigation into the controversial settlement was intentionally led astray by county officials - including current County Counsel Wendy Chaitin. The claim describes Chaitin as someone who "had an involvement" in the situation that led to Falor's "separation" from county work. And Falor's claim states that this year's Grand Jury - which is completing the investigation - submitted a letter of recommendation supporting Chaitin's "quest to be appointed as county counsel." Sources say the letter exists and was submitted to the Board of Supervisors in late November...

...The claim also refers to pre-settlement circumstances. It states that Falor "is informed and believes" that one or more county officials "used their positions" to obtain the unsigned settlement agreement and "then disclosed that information." In a letter sent to the county's outside attorney last December, Falor's former lawyer, Wendy Wyse, said that the unsigned settlement document was released to a deputy county counsel. County officials have said that the counsel's office was not involved in the settlement dealings or the Grand Jury probes.

Names of people listed as being responsible for Falor's injuries include Chaitin, former Interim County Counsel Ralph Faust, "certain employees of the County Counsel's Office" and supervisors John Woolley, Bonnie Neely and Jimmy Smith. All three supervisors had voted to appoint Chaitin, who is considered an interim counsel but will be evaluated for permanent appointment.

The claim lists "other county employees and representatives who published and/or released information about Ms. Falor in violation of her rights" as well. Also included are members of the 2006-07 Grand Jury, and the "county employees which led the members... to publish defamatory information about Ms. Falor."
McKinleyville Press
(May also be in The Independent...)


  1. Yikes, things are starting to get interesting....


  3. I remember reading a post on this blog from an "anonymous" when this topic came up a couple of weeks ago that sounded like an insider at the county that spelled out what happened supposedly to Falor. It seemed logical to me that it could be true.

    Once Falor filed a claim against the county, all documents could be obtained as public records. This is the case with any type of claim filed against the county.

  4. $289,000 wasnt enough money, now she wants MORE? this is wonder our economy is doing so bad. more americans now make a living through frivolous lawsuits than working a job.....this woman falor is milking the situation at OUR expense....

  5. Well,that's one view. Another view is that maybe she was wronged by subordinates. Still another view might be that she was wronged by her bosses. Our board of Sups do some pretty damn dumb stuff. Just saying!

  6. payoff means somebody messed up or they would have fought it. see tooby ranch suit. when the county thinks they are right they will spend millions

  7. ummmm....."payoff" means the situation is over....the county paid her off, the situation should be over...$289,000 for 2 months of uncomfortable working conditions, and now she wants MORE? this is a scam....

    i think that the county should lay all of its cards on the table and tell the community what went wrong...get it out in the open or blackmailers, such as falor, will continue to suck funds from US..

  8. unless they broke the terms of the agreement and further damaged her. dirty, dirty.

  9. damaged her? they gave her $289,000, and she wants MORE!!!....if she wants more money, "further damage" had better mean a broken leg or two, not hurt feelings....

  10. if her professional reputation has been damaged $289,000 is a pittance.

  11. her professional reputation as a topnotch blackmailer will offset any losses to her other professions......

    by the way, what was her salary if $289,000 is a "pittance"? i suspect that the poster at 7:16 is falor or a close relative, so any answers would be much appreciated...

  12. any poster with information would be greatly appreciated.....if no information is to be had, posters should make it clear that thier statements are based on speculation....

    posters with actual information should include evidence in thier claims.....

    why do i feel like a high school english teacher?

  13. I imagine County Counsel salary is posted on the County site somewhere.

    I suspect it is not about money, Theo. There's slot to read in Mintz's article that raises concern.

  14. rose,
    i hope that you are correct........if she asks for more money, i will be very suspect(as if im not suspect already) of her motives....

    and of course there is alot to read in the article, thats why we paid out $289, me old fashioned, but settling out of court and recieving a payoff seems to me like a final solution, not a starting point for more blackmailing....

  15. theo your missing the mark by a mile. She did not violate the settlement agreement. "They" did. She has every right to cry foul. I hope she makes them bleed dollars. That's the only way to stop the arrogance of county goverment.

  16. 7:51,
    so......the way to stop "county arrogance" is to let county employees throw tax dollars around until the county is "bleeding dollars"?

    interesting logic there......

    the only way to stop county arrogance is to expose the whole story to the taxpayers.......

  17. I tend to agree, Theo.

  18. What is with you Theo. Are you saying that the county can harm its ex-employees with impunity and the ex-employee can't stop them? The only way to get them to stop is to sue because they evidently have clearly demonstrated that nothing else will stop them. Are you saying that if this happened to you, you would just say OK, fine, and wouldn't sue them because it would be paid by our taxes. That is ridiculous.

    I quite frankly am resenting the county staff/elected officials that believe that they can run over the rights of their former employees and don't give a damn if their stupid self-centered behavior results in lawsuits. I see their behavior as what is really wrong here.

  19. 8:59,
    you need to be more specific on your claim. since you have inside information, please provide us evidence as to the harms commited....

    .....for the amount of money that we are talking about, we had better be looking at some SERIOUS damage. thats the point im trying to make.....


Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.