Saturday, October 18, 2014

"It would seem that if you were running for City Council you might want to divulge that you filed a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy petition, just a little over 2 years ago...." UPDATED

Is a Bankruptcy filing by a Eureka City Council candidate relevant information? - John Chiv/Words Worth
Kim Bergel and her husband filed bankruptcy in July of 2012 and listed $222,514 in unsecured creditors along with $233,794 in secured and priority creditors for a total of $524,248.
Bankrupt? You too can pay off $524,248 with just $51,720 - John Chiv/Words Worth
__________________

Soooo........

Here we are. In a year when almost every item on the ballot is asking for MORE money. Which means the budget is Issue #1.

So. This is sad. And yet it is very relevant. Because you're asking for a position that will oversee public funds, and which arguably will make decisions, or pass ordinances which will involve punishing people who don't pay their bills or follow rules.

I've spoken to John, who is working without a scanner, and he has transcribed the documents listed amounts.

And, on another note, I sit here shaking my head, thinking - what if?
What if this were the 'other side'? You'd be seeing interactive charts, complete with analysis, and comments threads with 1,000 denunciations.
__________________

J. Eric Bergel Responds: It's interesting to note Mr. Chiv's obvious bias as evidenced by the fact that he didn't brother to report on Mike Newman's 2004 Chapter 7 (non-repayment) bankruptcy. I'd be curious to know if his pre-economic meltdown bankruptcy was a result of a nearly fatal accident as ours was. I'd also be interested in ascertaining whether or not he made an effort comparable to our nearly four years doing everything within our power to avoid bankruptcy.

We deeply regret the damage we caused to local business as a result of our misfortune. We only exercised our right to protection under the law as an absolute last resort after exhausting all other avenues. Then, against the advice of our attorney, we filed a repayment plan (chapter 13) rather than walking away from our debt (chapter 7) as we were legally entitled to do.

The unfortunate reality is that after all the damage caused by thirty years of trickle down, voodoo economics and deregulation which resulted in the latest devastating economic melt down, financial success can no longer be relied upon as an accurate gauge to measure a person’s intelligence, aptitude, work ethic or character. Because the playing field is no longer level, it makes it very difficult for working class people to achieve or even maintain the American dream.

I understand campaigning for political office often turns to blood sport, especially when a candidate is seriously threatened, but I really do believe in the golden rule as well as the adage that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Perhaps it could be modified in this case to state, those who have soiled there own reputation should not sling mud.

47 comments:

  1. Linda Atkins and Melinda Ciarabellini did not do a background check on their endorsed candidate.

    Rose, lib jon will have a fit because you linked this and find a way to blame this on Republicans.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maybe it was a strategic bankruptcy due to an underwater mortgage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well if you read the Chiv report, it reveals lots of debts including IRS, credit card and others. It looks like a classic case of them living way beyond their means. Does that disqualify her? Isn't a fact that the Government and (Eureka in particular) have been living way beyond their means. Are you aware that Eureka is millions and millions in debt borrowing to pay for their extravagant pensions, especially for the cops? Is that much different than what Ms. Bergel did. Newman is still a slime and Albin is an admitted prescription drug overuser which causes him to act out bizarrely. All of these candidates have issues.

      Delete
  3. 6;09,don.t be dumb, if that had happened they would be solvent

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nice! Let the mud slinging begin!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Understand this, and you will go a long way to understanding politics in America and HumCo - Republicans and conservatives are more likely to attack a person's private life or character b/c their main political stance is to support wealth which in practice means undermine the exact body they are being elected to.

    Exhibits:

    A) Kim Bergel's family finances
    B) Janelle Eggers - who do you serve questions? What again?
    C) that guy, what's his name, I can't even picture his face right now, uhhh, *scrolls to top of blog and back* it's not coming to me, but I do know he is the root of all that's bad and borderline evil in the courthouse.

    -LJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LJ that guy, through his incompetence allowed a murderer who Bbq'd his victim to walk the streets as a free man. I hope you lock your doors at night.

      Delete
    2. I can't begin to delve into the years-old narrative that Paul haters have established. Enjoy your hatred.

      LJ

      Delete
    3. Even a lot of us dems turned in paul the turd. Sheesh l j. Wake up and spell " INCOMPETENT".

      Delete
  6. It is Janelle Egger who is attacking, LJ. I believe SHE is the one filing a l lawsuit oh-so-many-years-after-the-fact of #Occupy's ignominious demise, Suddenly now, just before an election. And you get furious because someone asks 'Why?" And, "Why NOW?"

    That's kinda funny, especially since you have to wrap it up into your other mantra.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is the thing Rose. I know Janelle and she is not attacking, she is protecting - she is fighting for a real First Amendment - not one that defines speech as money or one that tell people they have to demonstrate on a narrow 3 foot corridor between 101 and a small patch of grass - oh, and don't get in people's way, oh, and your curfew hours are...Janelle is a woman on a mission whose last objective is 15 minutes of fame or anything to do with November's elections. To use the rhetoric of the people on your side of the chasm - Janelle's "beef"- is with the BOS - the County, not the City, and the next significant County election isn't for another year and a half. Poor planning on Janelle's part and/or on the person or entity she "serves".

    The questions conservatives ask more often have to do with personality and the character of your opponents (Chris K last June for reference). Of course they will not measure up, but it's not because of their character it is because they will promote policies which you disagree with.

    Republicans want the electorate to ignore their policy recommendations and focus on the people. Why is that I wonder?

    Maybe because if they do focus on policy, they will realize that all conservatives are trying to do is protect those with money. All this other flag waving and founders talk is just that - talk.

    And Janelle's work is the best example of that - she is fighting for something conservatives and libertarians give lip service to - freedom of speech - real freedom which isn't always the button-down, or in-side-the-box expression that conservatives rhetorically value more than actual freedom of speech.

    LJ

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's interesting to note Mr. Chiv's obvious bias as evidenced by the fact that he didn't brother to report on Mike Newman's 2004 Chapter 7 (non-repayment) bankruptcy. I'd be curious to know if his pre-economic meltdown bankruptcy was a result of a nearly fatal accident as ours was. I'd also be interested in ascertaining whether or not he made an effort comparable to our nearly four years doing everything within our power to avoid bankruptcy.

    We deeply regret the damage we caused to local business as a result of our misfortune. We only exercised our right to protection under the law as an absolute last resort after exhausting all other avenues. Then, against the advice of our attorney, we filed a repayment plan (chapter 13) rather than walking away from our debt (chapter 7) as we were legally entitled to do.

    The unfortunate reality is that after all the damage caused by thirty years of trickle down, voodoo economics and deregulation which resulted in the latest devastating economic melt down, financial success can no longer be relied upon as an accurate gauge to measure a person’s intelligence, aptitude, work ethic or character. Because the playing field is no longer level, it makes it very difficult for working class people to achieve or even maintain the American dream.

    I understand campaigning for political office often turns to blood sport, especially when a candidate is seriously threatened, but I really do believe in the golden rule as well as the adage that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Perhaps it could be modified in this case to state, those who have soiled there own reputation should not sling mud.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So..The truth is mudslinging? Eric you do more harm than good. Your wife is running not you so perhaps you should rethink your blogging career. If she's elected are you going to take a chair on the dais and speak for her? Tell me where was she working during the years 2009 to present to help prevent screwing locals businesses from your own economic plan under chapter 13? Nowhere right? I am not buying it Eric. The amount you and she owed local business doesn't jive with your "excuses"

      Delete
  9. Thank you, Eric. I have added that to the post above.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Eric, I published the comment you sent to my blog and I will respond to it on my blog, on my schedule, not yours.

    I think viewers should read the comment you published on my blog which is different and my response but I will be glad to add both on Rose's blog, shortly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course you are free to publish whatever you want wherever you can as long as it is not defamatory, but you are in error if you are under the impression that I am actually interested in a response from you. My comments regarding Newman's BK were rhetorical.

      Delete
  11. Eric,

    Thank you for your comments.

    In either post, I did not put the reason why you went into debt. If you would like to explain the circumstances, I would be glad to post that information.

    Mike Newman's bankruptcy was years ago and he has made full restitution. His bankruptcy was over a decade ago. Mike took on debts accumulated during his marriage as a result of his divorce and made all payments in full. Mike's debt was approximately 50 thousand in credit card debt.

    Yours and your wife's bankruptcy for half a million dollars was filed in 2012 and includes money owed to local businesses and the payment cycle is not complete so it is relevant information to voters for this election.

    Mike Newman had no idea I was doing this post. In fact, I called him after the first post was already up.

    Eric's comment:

    J. Eric BergelOctober 19, 2014 at 9:20 AM
    John, before you go too far down the road of moral superiority, perhaps you should investigate and report on Mike Newman's 2004 Chapter 7 (non-repayment) bankruptcy.
    I'd be curious to know if his pre-economic bankruptcy was a result of a nearly fatal accident as ours was. I'd also be interested in ascertaining whether or not he made an effort of nearly four years duration to avoid bankruptcy as we did.

    Rest assured Kim is very unlikely to engage in a mud-slinging campaign. Mike may be similarly inclined. But if you want to get into it, I can certainly oblige you.

    ReplyDelete

    Previous posts:

    http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2014/10/bankrupt-you-too-can-pay-off-524248.html
    http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2014/10/is-bankruptcy-filing-by-eureka-city.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. John, your reporting is transparently biased as well as factually inaccurate. There are numerous errors in amounts and creditors owed in your report and the half a million dollar amount you keep referring to is misleading in that it includes our mortgage and other liabilities which are current expenses. I had a near fatal accident which put me out of work for nearly six months of recovery. Simultaneously the economy crashed and we were forced to downsize our construction business. We went from a credit score of over 800 to exhausting our life savings and nearly losing our family home trying to avoid bankruptcy. Although I could wade through the minutiae of our various personal finances with you, I find it tedious and irrelevant. Trying to make political hay out of a candidate's past misfortune is in extremely poor taste and especially hypocritical in this instance. Wouldn't the electorate be better served if you were to focus on the issues at hand rather than the personal lives of the people dedicating their best efforts to resolving them? (Again, a rhetorical question.) If anyone who is considering voting for Kim feels they need further information on this matter, I'm sure she would be willing to discuss it personally. Her contact information can be found on her campaign's website and Facebook page.

      Delete
    2. Eyes glazing over. If electing Kim means listening to this guy, I'm changing my vote.

      Delete
    3. Seems like a very reasonable reply and explanation. I usually think Chiv does try not to lose the forest through the trees of partisanship, but here, this attack is pretty petty and unkind. I'm disappointed in you

      Delete
    4. 10:17, could you clarify who you are disappointed in? Chiv is not asking for facts to be discussed personally.
      If Eric Bergel wants to say that they do not owe local businesses money, he needs to state that in these public responses.

      Delete
    5. Ok. Now we get a sliver of truth. Kim and her husband lived beyond their means when the economy crashed. The business had to downsize (like everyone else) so she filed to discharge the debt INSTEAD OF GETTING A JOB AND PAYING OFF THE DEBT.

      Delete
  12. Explains her unintelligible reasons for supporting Measure R. She doesn't seem to understand cause and effect.

    ReplyDelete
  13. If you're talking to 7:17, seems to me that he is playing fast and loose with the facts. Look at Bergel's comment. He gave a pretty reasonable explanation for declaring bankruptcy.

    Without commenting on this, John wrote, "Mike took on debts accumulated during his marriage as a result of his divorce and made all payments in full." Later, when confronted, John admitted that Mike declared chapter 7 bankruptcy where there is NO repayment. Somehow though John still think it is fair to compare a chapter 13 and chapter 7 bankruptcy.

    Basically, John's saying Mike is better because Mike decided to declare bankruptcy where he didn't ever have to pay anyone back when compared to Bergel who also declared bankruptcy but elected to repay debts and is still in the process of doing that. Seems pretty lame to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 12:14 basically what people, other than the Bergel spin doctors, are noting is that you don't say you are for local businesses and local employees and then currently owe money to the same people.

      Eric's rants, which you can claim as reasonable explaination, came after three posts and several comments.

      Still nothing from Kim, who is the one running for office. I guess it is okay to attack the people you want Double standards by the lib brigade.

      Delete
    2. Well, bottom line is if they were in fact in a life-threatening accident, I don't hold it against them if that is really the reason they had to declare bankruptcy. That has nothing to do with being for or against local business.

      It is frankly a BS argument. If a firefighter is hurt while extinguishing the fire at my home that started through no fault of mine, am I anti-firefighter? Obviously not.

      Delete
    3. 100 grand in credit card debt alone is bad and buying 4 new vehicles in a Year is living beyond your means. I mean they make 120 grand a year.

      Delete
  14. Thank you Eric for responding and putting to an end (as much as is possible with the good folks on the other side of the aisle) this clear baloney. This is what is called as negative campaigning. Kim does not have to partake in these types of tactics because she can answer policy questions.

    -jon yalcinkaya

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh bull shit. She can't even hold down a job to keep from declaring bankruptcy. And she wants a Leadership position?

      Delete
  15. Seriously, anyone who runs for political office who doesn't think that the fact of a bankruptcy proceeding will come up is a moron. And whining about people picking on you is probably not the best reponse, IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anon, I don't remember Mike's apparent bankruptcy being an issue do you? Honestly I could care less, if the right does care, then either they should have been bringing this up with their candidate 4 years ago and getting the low-down, or they should copt to this being strictly a political witch hunt. -lib jon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So it is the right's fault that the left cannot do research?

      This is not four years ago. It is now. I want to see the documents.

      No he said, he said, they said.

      Delete
    2. That's not "research" many or most on the left would do. If they did do it, it is not information that would sway many or most on the left - nor on the right for that matter, because when it comes down to it, most on the right really don't care either.

      Honestly, given a choice between a Mike Newman who had experienced the exact circumstances the Bergel's did and a Kim Bergel who didn't, would you vote for Kim, or would you find a way to vote for Mike.

      In other words, is a person's character more important to you or the policies they will govern with? I think everybody running has character metric(if such a thing where to be possible) within a margin of error of everyone else. They all simply have slightly different world views.

      To say you are basing your decision on character, or worse to make races about personal issues instead of public policy issues is disingenuous at best and knowingly misleading at worst.

      Delete
    3. Jon, get off your holier than thou attitude.
      It is the left that made an issue ofRyan Sundberg's DUI, Johanna Rodoni's DUI.

      It is the left that on a regular basis uses words like Gang of Four, personal remarks about business men and women and politicians they disaprove.

      Where was your sanctimonious rage when people were calling Chet Albin names?

      You have no clue about local history and politics yet you keep blogging away and commenting everywhere.

      Kim Bergel is not qualified to manage the city budget because she cannot budget, period. Her husband needs to spend more time paying his debts off to local businesses instead of bullying a blogger who pointed out inconvenient truths for the Bergels.

      Delete
    4. I'm not holier than any one - we are find ways to reach the "holy" standard in our lives.

      http://tuluwatexaminer.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/this-weeks-hubris-and-drug-induced-dumb-ass-award-goes-to

      Delete
    5. Also this which just came to my attention randomly. Something I had completely forgotten about.

      http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2014/aug/14/eureka-councilman-allegedly-has-drug-fueled-alterc/#comment-1546552194.

      LJ

      Delete
    6. It was not an issue because his opponent chose not to make it one. Newman is desperate. Knows he is going to lose, so his operatives are slinging mud.

      Delete
  17. NOTE: Sometimes people post duplicate comments, whether because of a Blogger glitch or to correct a typo. When a comment shows as having been deleted by user, sometimes people infer that something more was said or that something was censored - that is rarely the case, and wasn't the case here, I have deleted Blogger's notation that any comments were removed by user for this reason.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Eric said: "...financial success can no longer be relied upon as an accurate gauge to measure a person’s intelligence, aptitude, work ethic or character."

    That simple and eloquent expression seems to sum it up for me. Both he and Newman faced a catastrophe in their own lives, and were forced to deal with it, not necessarily the way they wanted to, but in a way that allowed them to move on.

    (I did have to laugh at the Blame Reagan, Blame Bush rant that preceded it, that wasn't necessary, and should have been edited out. A devastating accident, a family owned business, a catastrophic downturn in the economy that 'shovel-ready fixes' did nothing to remedy... everyone here is paying the price for that.

    Let Kim run on her merits. And, really, let her answer. She is the candidate who must run through the gauntlet of fire, walk across the coals, painful as it is for you to see her have to do that, you have to let her do it - in the end, she will be stronger, and better able to face what will come her way if she is elected.)

    ReplyDelete
  19. That is pretty slimey of you Chiv! You are bias and have always had a difficult time being objective. I applaud Kim and her husband for choosing a repayment plan. Frankly, Eureka does not need folks like creepy Newman and druggie Albin. Eureka needs new blood in there! She has my vote!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, who you vote for is your prerogative.

      Slimey is in the eye of the beholder. I think it is pretty nasty that Kim Bergel and her husband owe local businesses money. Your snit fit is just that they got exposed before the election.

      Calling Mike and Chet names is so mature of you and not at all biased.

      Delete
    2. If Newman really used a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, then he would not have repaid any of the debts. With Chapter 7, you walk away from the debt.

      Delete
  20. Exactly! So it is okay for Newman to file Chapter 7 and NOT pay his debts to local merchants but Bergel's get slammed for being better that Newman but agreeing to enter into a repayment plan. What is wrong with this picture? Oh, I know he is "good ol boy" so they look the other way. Such hypocrisy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike Newman did not owe any money to local merchants. But you don't read facts, you just keep trolling blogs. Only to repeat the chant the good ole boy mantra.

      Tell your script writer to do research before telling you what to say.

      Delete
    2. Spin away! Must be embarrassing for Newman to have this smear come back to bite him!

      Delete
    3. Fuck over 500k in small businesses that's inexcusable. This isn't an old thing she is currently in bankruptcy and that's a real problem. Can't imagine why this is excusable. Sorry.

      Delete

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