Wednesday, March 18, 2015

More Web Of Lies: "Board of Supervisors’ recent actions no great mystery"

Richard Salzman opines. Or spins. The usual. Lies.

The only "mystery" here is why Ricard Salzman's sorry ass is involved in this one.

Oh, ok, here's the real link to his latest POS in the Times-Standard. ◼ Salzman's My Word (And by the way, Kimberley, you do your paper a great disservice when you give this liar a credible platform.)

You do understand that when it comes to the Sheriff and the Coroners Office, they've CONSOLIDATED two very distinct departments, don't you?

And what's this about County Counsel?

Salzman says: "For anyone who doesn’t remember, HumCPR once sued and County Counsel (including Carolyn Ruth) defended us, the people of Humboldt County. We lost, they won and in the end we had to pay HumCPR’s attorney Allison Jackson $100,000 in taxpayer money." See how he spins it? "Defending us, the people of Humboldt County" Ummm, not exactly, Richard, ol' buddy, ol' pal.

ACTUALLY - this one deserves some real clarification. Starting with the fact that Salzman is just pissed off that his guys lost several election. So he's out to defame the Board of Supervisors. Knowing that you are totally uninformed, he feels very safe in making his accusations.

Let's look at the facts, because the TRUTH is a matter of Public Record (very important). Recognizing that the job of County Counsel is to give good advice and keep the County and the Board out of trouble, make sure the law is followed and SAVE them from expensive losses in court, not allowing (his or her) petty personal agendas to get in the way. And then realizing what REALLY happened.

The simple fact is, County Counsel REFUSED to comply with a Public Records Act Request. Repeatedly refused. Stubbornly refused. And that refusal cost the County $100,000.

The attorney’s fees paid by the county for Ruth’s poor advice on the CPRA lawsuit (as well as all the other frivolous suits she got the county in) was to cover legal fees incurred by the public when she told the Board that the public has no right to know how much they had been spending in lawsuits. In fact, she wrote that the public was too stupid to understand the issues.

The arguments she advanced on the County’s behalf was that the trial court should make new law to allow the county to withhold from the public all costs of litigation for three reasons: 1) the public was too opinionated to correctly decide a good lawsuit from a bad one; 2) if the public found out about the costs of lawsuits they might use it as an election issue, and; 3) if the public found out the costs they might press for other alternatives to the lawsuit.

A person cannot make this stuff up. These concepts are what was in the county’s own brief as justification for the County’s position. Even the Times Standard wrote an article about the County’s position and cited commentators, questioning the wisdom of the County for taking these positions about the release of documents of costs that the taxpayers are ultimately shouldering.

The suit resolved when the county hired private counsel who told them that they would lose and that they would end up owing twice as much in fees and costs.

So much for "mystery solved."

As for County Counsel: The question now is to the Board and if and when they will re-review Ruth’s job description and revote on the issue. She should have never gotten any raise to do the very things within her job description and which she was already getting a boost in pay for.

What Carolyn Ruth claimed for the reasons justifying the raise were part already of her current job description as assistant county counsel and for which she was already getting additional money. Her job description is also public information and easy to find: ◼ Go to then scroll down to pages 94-96.

This is QUITE different from consolidating two entire departments into one.

Isn't it now? Richard?

(Cue "Sara the Dog" Salzman's anonymous attacks in 1 - 2 - 3...)

Calling Richard Salzman on his BS, I mean His Word - John Chiv/Words Worth
"You say compensation, I say spiking, compensation! spiking ! Let's call the whole thing off"; instead taxpayers get stiffed by Humboldt County unions and special MOUs - John Chiv/Words Worth
After two motions failed on Asst County Counsel and a heated discussion, a third motion passes - John Chiv/Words Worth

Asst County Counsel "compensation" to be pulled off consent, Supervisors and other community members respond to my original post - John Chiv/Words Worth
Why is an Assistant County Counsel who is retiring, cost the County and taxpayers money in litigation being given a raise for doing her job? - John Chiv/Words Worth

County Employees to Rally Outside Courthouse, Say They’re Understaffed, Unsafe - Ryan Burns/LoCo
Downey Bumped Up: Supes Approve Sheriff-Coroner Pay Hike Unanimously - Hank Sims/LoCo