In a release late yesterday afternoon, Davis City Manager Bill Emlen announced that the city was looking to hire an independent investigator to perform a detailed review of the findings and recommendations of the recently released Grand Jury report.
“The nature and scope of issues raised in this report are significant, and warrant a comprehensive review and response from the City.”
City Manager Bill Emlen told the Vanguard that he hopes to make an announcement on the selection of an independent investigator by the end of this week. His first choice seemed to be Police Ombudsman Bob Aaronson but if it is not Bob Aaronson himself, it will be someone like Bob Aaronson. Mr. Aaronson has the advantage of already being on staff and already having familiarity with the city of Davis.
The move follows increasing pressure on the city to thoroughly examine the Grand Jury report released late Monday of last week. Mr. Emlen called the report a “black cloud” hanging over the city. He recognized the need for an independent review that would give the public confidence in whatever finding.
Last week, City Councilmember Lamar Heystek was interviewed on CBS News Channel 13 in Sacramento.
“I think we need to bring in outside help to look into the Grand Jury allegations.”
Over the weekend, Mayor Ruth Asmundson expressed her dismay at the turn of events. The Mayor told KCRA TV in Sacramento:
“I was really surprised and concerned that there’s something amiss in our fire department.”
In the release, Bill Emlen’s stated goals for the investigation include:
- Be clear to the public that we are committed to a thorough, objective evaluation of the Grand Jury’s report.
- Be clear to all sources that we will retain their confidentiality in bringing information forward.
- Ensure that those affected in the report are treated fairly and in an impartial manner.
In his conversation with the Vanguard, City Manager Bill Emlen was concerned that it would be difficult to retrace some of the steps that the Grand Jury took. In particular, many of the employees who were fearful of retribution had to have extraordinary steps taken in order for them to feel comfortable testifying. I asked him if the city could also make such assurances to protect their identity, and he said that the city could do that and could guarantee protection. However, he was not sure that would be enough to get them to come forward.
As important is the pledge of transparency. The report is not going to be something done in closed session, submitted in private.
“We are committed to a transparent process with the independent investigator’s report ultimately presented to the City Council in open session.”
The law requires the city to submit a response within 90 days of the Grand Jury’s report. That means by the end of September. However, Mr. Emlen would like that to be done much sooner.
“Our goal is to respond to the Grand Jury’s report much earlier than is required by law.”
One way or another, he believes that this is a cloud hanging over the city. He either wants to exonerate the fire department or take appropriate action as soon as possible.
Commentary
An independent investigation is exactly what the Vanguard has wanted to see happen from the start.
Bill Emlen’s initial statement and reaction was alarming last Tuesday:
“We believe the Grand Jury Report includes several statements that are factually incorrect. Taken together, they contribute to a less-than-accurate picture of the Davis Fire Department.”
However, he has now stepped up to the plate and done what needed to be done. This was an excellent statement by the City Manager. He has done everything here that needs to be done. Mayor Ruth Asmundson is to be commended as well for her forceful advocacy to look into this report and not attempt to sweep the problem under the rug.
The Vanguard is hopeful that Bob Aaronson will be the one who conducts this investigation. In 2006, he had to perform a tough investigation in the city of Santa Cruz, investigating allegations that the city police were spying on anti-war protesters. The initial report by the police was conducted by the very person who ordered such surveillance. Mr. Aaronson called the police on an unprofessional report and then castigated them for their unlawful surveillance against the anti-war protestors.
It is ironic that the man brought in to investigate complaints against the police department would have his first major investigation be to look into the fire department.
Councilmember Stephen Souza has been quiet on this issue. It is somewhat ironic however that both at the time of creating the position of ombudsman and in March of 2007 when Aaronson gave his six month report, Mr. Souza called for the ombudsman to investigate more than just police complaints. While it seems impractical for the ombudsman to handle day to day complaints about things like public works, it is more fitting that this type of investigation fall into the hands of person hired to be an independent eye for the city.
The City Manager acknowledges the severity of these charges and recognizes that neither he nor his employees are the ones that should be investigating this report.
Whoever ends up with the investigation has a difficult and unenviable task. As the City Manager acknowledges, the road map laid out by the Grand Jury is a difficult one to replicate. It took the Grand Jury over a year to conduct this investigation. The issues of retribution and confidentiality are difficult ones to grapple with both on the side of individual accused employees as well as whistle blowers.
However, the city has now recognized that they cannot unring this bell. They must press forward and find out if these accusation have merit.
Frankly this is all we ever wanted from the start–a process by which we can determine if the Grand Jury’s report has merit and a process by which the city can deal appropriately with individuals if needed.
Hiring an independent investigator helps the city both meet the needs of the public and protects the rights of the employees.
Once again Mayor Ruth Asmundson and City Manager Bill Emlen deserve tremendous credit for doing the right thing in this situation. They have the full confidence of the Vanguard as they move forward.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Congratulations on maintaining some objectivity, or at least willingness to revise your view for the current City situation.
Congratulations on maintaining some objectivity, or at least willingness to revise your view for the current City situation.
Congratulations on maintaining some objectivity, or at least willingness to revise your view for the current City situation.
Congratulations on maintaining some objectivity, or at least willingness to revise your view for the current City situation.
I don’t think DPD is revising his views. He expressed concern and is now acknowledging that the city manager and mayor are doing the right thing by calling for an investigation.
I’m glad to see the city is taking this seriously and not sweeping it under the rug.
Bill Emlen is correct. This is like a cloud hanging over the city.
I don’t think DPD is revising his views. He expressed concern and is now acknowledging that the city manager and mayor are doing the right thing by calling for an investigation.
I’m glad to see the city is taking this seriously and not sweeping it under the rug.
Bill Emlen is correct. This is like a cloud hanging over the city.
I don’t think DPD is revising his views. He expressed concern and is now acknowledging that the city manager and mayor are doing the right thing by calling for an investigation.
I’m glad to see the city is taking this seriously and not sweeping it under the rug.
Bill Emlen is correct. This is like a cloud hanging over the city.
I don’t think DPD is revising his views. He expressed concern and is now acknowledging that the city manager and mayor are doing the right thing by calling for an investigation.
I’m glad to see the city is taking this seriously and not sweeping it under the rug.
Bill Emlen is correct. This is like a cloud hanging over the city.
I hope they don’t hire that guy who took down David Serena only to have the case dismissed by a judge.
Don’t forget the role the Grand Jury and outside investigator played in the purge of Serena. I am very skeptical of this whole process and all of you should be as well.
I hope they don’t hire that guy who took down David Serena only to have the case dismissed by a judge.
Don’t forget the role the Grand Jury and outside investigator played in the purge of Serena. I am very skeptical of this whole process and all of you should be as well.
I hope they don’t hire that guy who took down David Serena only to have the case dismissed by a judge.
Don’t forget the role the Grand Jury and outside investigator played in the purge of Serena. I am very skeptical of this whole process and all of you should be as well.
I hope they don’t hire that guy who took down David Serena only to have the case dismissed by a judge.
Don’t forget the role the Grand Jury and outside investigator played in the purge of Serena. I am very skeptical of this whole process and all of you should be as well.
That was a different grand jury.
Bobby Weist has already acknowledged a portion of the report as true – the part about fire fighters sleeping off their drunkeness at the fire station.
It was reported in some news report that a citizen of Davis thought this was a fine idea and suggested that all people who leave the bars too drunk to drive home should be allowed to sleep at the downtown fire station.
That was a different grand jury.
Bobby Weist has already acknowledged a portion of the report as true – the part about fire fighters sleeping off their drunkeness at the fire station.
It was reported in some news report that a citizen of Davis thought this was a fine idea and suggested that all people who leave the bars too drunk to drive home should be allowed to sleep at the downtown fire station.
That was a different grand jury.
Bobby Weist has already acknowledged a portion of the report as true – the part about fire fighters sleeping off their drunkeness at the fire station.
It was reported in some news report that a citizen of Davis thought this was a fine idea and suggested that all people who leave the bars too drunk to drive home should be allowed to sleep at the downtown fire station.
That was a different grand jury.
Bobby Weist has already acknowledged a portion of the report as true – the part about fire fighters sleeping off their drunkeness at the fire station.
It was reported in some news report that a citizen of Davis thought this was a fine idea and suggested that all people who leave the bars too drunk to drive home should be allowed to sleep at the downtown fire station.
Skeptics never provide alternatives. They can only be skeptical. What other process is there for oversight? Here is what I would be worried about. If I lie to the investigator, whether employee or whistleblower. The Grand Jury can subpoena the independent investigators notes and find out who is not telling the truth depending on what some say.
With an independent investigator, again, a whistleblower would have to willingly come forward. With the Grand Jury, they do not have a choice, nor do they have a choice to not answer truthfully.
You do not think the Union has circled its wagons now? You do not think the pressure of being a rat is on them? I am sure the Union bosses are on a witch hunt night and day to sniff out whoever betrayed them.
Skeptics never provide alternatives. They can only be skeptical. What other process is there for oversight? Here is what I would be worried about. If I lie to the investigator, whether employee or whistleblower. The Grand Jury can subpoena the independent investigators notes and find out who is not telling the truth depending on what some say.
With an independent investigator, again, a whistleblower would have to willingly come forward. With the Grand Jury, they do not have a choice, nor do they have a choice to not answer truthfully.
You do not think the Union has circled its wagons now? You do not think the pressure of being a rat is on them? I am sure the Union bosses are on a witch hunt night and day to sniff out whoever betrayed them.
Skeptics never provide alternatives. They can only be skeptical. What other process is there for oversight? Here is what I would be worried about. If I lie to the investigator, whether employee or whistleblower. The Grand Jury can subpoena the independent investigators notes and find out who is not telling the truth depending on what some say.
With an independent investigator, again, a whistleblower would have to willingly come forward. With the Grand Jury, they do not have a choice, nor do they have a choice to not answer truthfully.
You do not think the Union has circled its wagons now? You do not think the pressure of being a rat is on them? I am sure the Union bosses are on a witch hunt night and day to sniff out whoever betrayed them.
Skeptics never provide alternatives. They can only be skeptical. What other process is there for oversight? Here is what I would be worried about. If I lie to the investigator, whether employee or whistleblower. The Grand Jury can subpoena the independent investigators notes and find out who is not telling the truth depending on what some say.
With an independent investigator, again, a whistleblower would have to willingly come forward. With the Grand Jury, they do not have a choice, nor do they have a choice to not answer truthfully.
You do not think the Union has circled its wagons now? You do not think the pressure of being a rat is on them? I am sure the Union bosses are on a witch hunt night and day to sniff out whoever betrayed them.
Yes, the Cops should be allowed to use empty holding cells as well. The parks department should be able to grab an unused gym when they get don partying. I would like to know how many started a shift soon after sleeping it off.
Yes, the Cops should be allowed to use empty holding cells as well. The parks department should be able to grab an unused gym when they get don partying. I would like to know how many started a shift soon after sleeping it off.
Yes, the Cops should be allowed to use empty holding cells as well. The parks department should be able to grab an unused gym when they get don partying. I would like to know how many started a shift soon after sleeping it off.
Yes, the Cops should be allowed to use empty holding cells as well. The parks department should be able to grab an unused gym when they get don partying. I would like to know how many started a shift soon after sleeping it off.
to ‘Seeking transparency”
This isn’t worth making a big deal about, because DPD is doing the right thing. But sometimes people need to just read what is written. Last week he had “no confidence” in the city on this matter. This week he has “full confidence”. But I guess you’re right, no revision.
to ‘Seeking transparency”
This isn’t worth making a big deal about, because DPD is doing the right thing. But sometimes people need to just read what is written. Last week he had “no confidence” in the city on this matter. This week he has “full confidence”. But I guess you’re right, no revision.
to ‘Seeking transparency”
This isn’t worth making a big deal about, because DPD is doing the right thing. But sometimes people need to just read what is written. Last week he had “no confidence” in the city on this matter. This week he has “full confidence”. But I guess you’re right, no revision.
to ‘Seeking transparency”
This isn’t worth making a big deal about, because DPD is doing the right thing. But sometimes people need to just read what is written. Last week he had “no confidence” in the city on this matter. This week he has “full confidence”. But I guess you’re right, no revision.
Last week I had had no confidence in the city to investigate this matter, this week I have full confidence in the process that has been set forward by the city manager with respect to an independent investigator.
Last week I had had no confidence in the city to investigate this matter, this week I have full confidence in the process that has been set forward by the city manager with respect to an independent investigator.
Last week I had had no confidence in the city to investigate this matter, this week I have full confidence in the process that has been set forward by the city manager with respect to an independent investigator.
Last week I had had no confidence in the city to investigate this matter, this week I have full confidence in the process that has been set forward by the city manager with respect to an independent investigator.
Let’s examine the accusations:
1. A climate of intimidation exists. The grand Jury said this about the Housing Authority as well. This is what they say when some connected person complains that their boss said no or when they have nothing else to criticize.
2. Drunk firefighters were allowed to sleep it off at the firehouse in violation of the rules. Oh my god! You have anything serious. If you want to push this I would say change the rules.
3. Favoritism in promotion. Now this could be serious it could also be that there are other considerations like experience or working relationships.
It just seems like there is not much here. Nobody ripped off the city or the taxpayers. The real question here is who’s dirty work did the GJ do on this one.
As for the remark about a differnt GJ. Just look at what this one did with WJUSD for trying to buy a building that wasn’t contaminated with toxic chemicals so the employess don’t get exposed. The entire thing in WJUSD is because Dudley Holman is friends with the owner of the property where WJUSD has its district office.
Different GJ same old Woodland redneck good ole boys scene.
Finally, DPD could it be that you are after the firefightrs union because of the way it worked against your wife in the election?
Let’s examine the accusations:
1. A climate of intimidation exists. The grand Jury said this about the Housing Authority as well. This is what they say when some connected person complains that their boss said no or when they have nothing else to criticize.
2. Drunk firefighters were allowed to sleep it off at the firehouse in violation of the rules. Oh my god! You have anything serious. If you want to push this I would say change the rules.
3. Favoritism in promotion. Now this could be serious it could also be that there are other considerations like experience or working relationships.
It just seems like there is not much here. Nobody ripped off the city or the taxpayers. The real question here is who’s dirty work did the GJ do on this one.
As for the remark about a differnt GJ. Just look at what this one did with WJUSD for trying to buy a building that wasn’t contaminated with toxic chemicals so the employess don’t get exposed. The entire thing in WJUSD is because Dudley Holman is friends with the owner of the property where WJUSD has its district office.
Different GJ same old Woodland redneck good ole boys scene.
Finally, DPD could it be that you are after the firefightrs union because of the way it worked against your wife in the election?
Let’s examine the accusations:
1. A climate of intimidation exists. The grand Jury said this about the Housing Authority as well. This is what they say when some connected person complains that their boss said no or when they have nothing else to criticize.
2. Drunk firefighters were allowed to sleep it off at the firehouse in violation of the rules. Oh my god! You have anything serious. If you want to push this I would say change the rules.
3. Favoritism in promotion. Now this could be serious it could also be that there are other considerations like experience or working relationships.
It just seems like there is not much here. Nobody ripped off the city or the taxpayers. The real question here is who’s dirty work did the GJ do on this one.
As for the remark about a differnt GJ. Just look at what this one did with WJUSD for trying to buy a building that wasn’t contaminated with toxic chemicals so the employess don’t get exposed. The entire thing in WJUSD is because Dudley Holman is friends with the owner of the property where WJUSD has its district office.
Different GJ same old Woodland redneck good ole boys scene.
Finally, DPD could it be that you are after the firefightrs union because of the way it worked against your wife in the election?
Let’s examine the accusations:
1. A climate of intimidation exists. The grand Jury said this about the Housing Authority as well. This is what they say when some connected person complains that their boss said no or when they have nothing else to criticize.
2. Drunk firefighters were allowed to sleep it off at the firehouse in violation of the rules. Oh my god! You have anything serious. If you want to push this I would say change the rules.
3. Favoritism in promotion. Now this could be serious it could also be that there are other considerations like experience or working relationships.
It just seems like there is not much here. Nobody ripped off the city or the taxpayers. The real question here is who’s dirty work did the GJ do on this one.
As for the remark about a differnt GJ. Just look at what this one did with WJUSD for trying to buy a building that wasn’t contaminated with toxic chemicals so the employess don’t get exposed. The entire thing in WJUSD is because Dudley Holman is friends with the owner of the property where WJUSD has its district office.
Different GJ same old Woodland redneck good ole boys scene.
Finally, DPD could it be that you are after the firefightrs union because of the way it worked against your wife in the election?
We are talking about decades of political campaigns. There have been complaints about the Union’s involvement in elections over 20 years – not just the last one.
We are talking about decades of political campaigns. There have been complaints about the Union’s involvement in elections over 20 years – not just the last one.
We are talking about decades of political campaigns. There have been complaints about the Union’s involvement in elections over 20 years – not just the last one.
We are talking about decades of political campaigns. There have been complaints about the Union’s involvement in elections over 20 years – not just the last one.
I can’t say that Asmundson and Emlen should be commended for “doing the right thing”. Lamar forced the issue by embarrassing the city into it – when he went to Channel 13 News. Frankly Bobby Wiest, who essentially spoke for the Fire Dept., made the GJ’s points for them – he is wielding far too much power. Furthermore, as a taxpayer, I don’t want my firefighters hung over on the job, especially with the kind of salaries they are making.
I can’t say that Asmundson and Emlen should be commended for “doing the right thing”. Lamar forced the issue by embarrassing the city into it – when he went to Channel 13 News. Frankly Bobby Wiest, who essentially spoke for the Fire Dept., made the GJ’s points for them – he is wielding far too much power. Furthermore, as a taxpayer, I don’t want my firefighters hung over on the job, especially with the kind of salaries they are making.
I can’t say that Asmundson and Emlen should be commended for “doing the right thing”. Lamar forced the issue by embarrassing the city into it – when he went to Channel 13 News. Frankly Bobby Wiest, who essentially spoke for the Fire Dept., made the GJ’s points for them – he is wielding far too much power. Furthermore, as a taxpayer, I don’t want my firefighters hung over on the job, especially with the kind of salaries they are making.
I can’t say that Asmundson and Emlen should be commended for “doing the right thing”. Lamar forced the issue by embarrassing the city into it – when he went to Channel 13 News. Frankly Bobby Wiest, who essentially spoke for the Fire Dept., made the GJ’s points for them – he is wielding far too much power. Furthermore, as a taxpayer, I don’t want my firefighters hung over on the job, especially with the kind of salaries they are making.
Union buster revolted taxpayer: Nobody said the firefighters were hung over on the job just that they slept it off in the firehouse while off-duty. I love the way you kill the union anti-tax people want to make this into something its not. Go ahead pound on the fire department. While you’re at it why don’t you go off about what you pay for 911 service it isn’t perfect either.
Union buster revolted taxpayer: Nobody said the firefighters were hung over on the job just that they slept it off in the firehouse while off-duty. I love the way you kill the union anti-tax people want to make this into something its not. Go ahead pound on the fire department. While you’re at it why don’t you go off about what you pay for 911 service it isn’t perfect either.
Union buster revolted taxpayer: Nobody said the firefighters were hung over on the job just that they slept it off in the firehouse while off-duty. I love the way you kill the union anti-tax people want to make this into something its not. Go ahead pound on the fire department. While you’re at it why don’t you go off about what you pay for 911 service it isn’t perfect either.
Union buster revolted taxpayer: Nobody said the firefighters were hung over on the job just that they slept it off in the firehouse while off-duty. I love the way you kill the union anti-tax people want to make this into something its not. Go ahead pound on the fire department. While you’re at it why don’t you go off about what you pay for 911 service it isn’t perfect either.
Thank you council member Lamar Heystek! If it wasn’t for his insistence that an independent investigator should be brought in then Emlen and Asmundson would not be supporting this.
Does anyone notice the silence of the newly re-elected mayor Pro Tem Don Saylor? Shhh…can you hear him? No. You know why? He’s laying low and trying not to upset Bobby Weist and the Chief.
Thank you council member Lamar Heystek! If it wasn’t for his insistence that an independent investigator should be brought in then Emlen and Asmundson would not be supporting this.
Does anyone notice the silence of the newly re-elected mayor Pro Tem Don Saylor? Shhh…can you hear him? No. You know why? He’s laying low and trying not to upset Bobby Weist and the Chief.
Thank you council member Lamar Heystek! If it wasn’t for his insistence that an independent investigator should be brought in then Emlen and Asmundson would not be supporting this.
Does anyone notice the silence of the newly re-elected mayor Pro Tem Don Saylor? Shhh…can you hear him? No. You know why? He’s laying low and trying not to upset Bobby Weist and the Chief.
Thank you council member Lamar Heystek! If it wasn’t for his insistence that an independent investigator should be brought in then Emlen and Asmundson would not be supporting this.
Does anyone notice the silence of the newly re-elected mayor Pro Tem Don Saylor? Shhh…can you hear him? No. You know why? He’s laying low and trying not to upset Bobby Weist and the Chief.
At least Don Saylor knows better than to dog pile the firefighters.
At least Don Saylor knows better than to dog pile the firefighters.
At least Don Saylor knows better than to dog pile the firefighters.
At least Don Saylor knows better than to dog pile the firefighters.
Rich Rifkin described it best when he said the fire department is “feeding at the trough.”
The fire chief has been asking for a fourth fire station for some years and we learn that it is being used for actions not allowed by the employee contract “sleeping off a hangover.” All we need is an Emergency Medical Center. Only 10% of calls are fire related. The rest are medical calls.
As president Bobby Weist of the Davis firefighters has put his men and women in a difficult position and so too has the fire chief. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Cronyism, belligerence while drunk downtown along with not complying with the department’s promotional opportunities should not be tolerated.
It’s time for a new fire chief from out of the Davis and Yolo area as the GJ suggested and time for a new union president not affiliated with Weist. It’s time to clean house.
This is an embarrassment to our city once again.
Rich Rifkin described it best when he said the fire department is “feeding at the trough.”
The fire chief has been asking for a fourth fire station for some years and we learn that it is being used for actions not allowed by the employee contract “sleeping off a hangover.” All we need is an Emergency Medical Center. Only 10% of calls are fire related. The rest are medical calls.
As president Bobby Weist of the Davis firefighters has put his men and women in a difficult position and so too has the fire chief. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Cronyism, belligerence while drunk downtown along with not complying with the department’s promotional opportunities should not be tolerated.
It’s time for a new fire chief from out of the Davis and Yolo area as the GJ suggested and time for a new union president not affiliated with Weist. It’s time to clean house.
This is an embarrassment to our city once again.
Rich Rifkin described it best when he said the fire department is “feeding at the trough.”
The fire chief has been asking for a fourth fire station for some years and we learn that it is being used for actions not allowed by the employee contract “sleeping off a hangover.” All we need is an Emergency Medical Center. Only 10% of calls are fire related. The rest are medical calls.
As president Bobby Weist of the Davis firefighters has put his men and women in a difficult position and so too has the fire chief. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Cronyism, belligerence while drunk downtown along with not complying with the department’s promotional opportunities should not be tolerated.
It’s time for a new fire chief from out of the Davis and Yolo area as the GJ suggested and time for a new union president not affiliated with Weist. It’s time to clean house.
This is an embarrassment to our city once again.
Rich Rifkin described it best when he said the fire department is “feeding at the trough.”
The fire chief has been asking for a fourth fire station for some years and we learn that it is being used for actions not allowed by the employee contract “sleeping off a hangover.” All we need is an Emergency Medical Center. Only 10% of calls are fire related. The rest are medical calls.
As president Bobby Weist of the Davis firefighters has put his men and women in a difficult position and so too has the fire chief. They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Cronyism, belligerence while drunk downtown along with not complying with the department’s promotional opportunities should not be tolerated.
It’s time for a new fire chief from out of the Davis and Yolo area as the GJ suggested and time for a new union president not affiliated with Weist. It’s time to clean house.
This is an embarrassment to our city once again.
what bb calls “dog pile” the others call “holding accountable.” if we live in davis we have the right to hold people in office or in public positions accountable.
saylor will not hold the firefighters accountable. they would “politically piss” on him and he won’t hold accountable the political hand that feeds him. he doesn’t have the courage to do so.
i hope bill emlen is able to find someone that will honestly do a good job of investigating the allegations of the grand jury report. they are serious.
thank you bill emlen and thank you ruth asmundson and lamar heystek.
what bb calls “dog pile” the others call “holding accountable.” if we live in davis we have the right to hold people in office or in public positions accountable.
saylor will not hold the firefighters accountable. they would “politically piss” on him and he won’t hold accountable the political hand that feeds him. he doesn’t have the courage to do so.
i hope bill emlen is able to find someone that will honestly do a good job of investigating the allegations of the grand jury report. they are serious.
thank you bill emlen and thank you ruth asmundson and lamar heystek.
what bb calls “dog pile” the others call “holding accountable.” if we live in davis we have the right to hold people in office or in public positions accountable.
saylor will not hold the firefighters accountable. they would “politically piss” on him and he won’t hold accountable the political hand that feeds him. he doesn’t have the courage to do so.
i hope bill emlen is able to find someone that will honestly do a good job of investigating the allegations of the grand jury report. they are serious.
thank you bill emlen and thank you ruth asmundson and lamar heystek.
what bb calls “dog pile” the others call “holding accountable.” if we live in davis we have the right to hold people in office or in public positions accountable.
saylor will not hold the firefighters accountable. they would “politically piss” on him and he won’t hold accountable the political hand that feeds him. he doesn’t have the courage to do so.
i hope bill emlen is able to find someone that will honestly do a good job of investigating the allegations of the grand jury report. they are serious.
thank you bill emlen and thank you ruth asmundson and lamar heystek.
Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves. Vote McCain
Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves. Vote McCain
Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves. Vote McCain
Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves. Vote McCain
Did anyone listen to John Kerry today on “Talk of the Nation” on KXJZ? His view on how unions will help pull us out of poverty are compelling. It will be available on NPR’s website after 6pm.
Did anyone listen to John Kerry today on “Talk of the Nation” on KXJZ? His view on how unions will help pull us out of poverty are compelling. It will be available on NPR’s website after 6pm.
Did anyone listen to John Kerry today on “Talk of the Nation” on KXJZ? His view on how unions will help pull us out of poverty are compelling. It will be available on NPR’s website after 6pm.
Did anyone listen to John Kerry today on “Talk of the Nation” on KXJZ? His view on how unions will help pull us out of poverty are compelling. It will be available on NPR’s website after 6pm.
What is the matter DPD? I agree with black bart, sounds like DPD has an axe to grind with the firefighters union. I can understand your bitterness and outspoken “modus” however I can’t understand your wife’s vocal attack on unions. Isn’t she working for of one of our largest unions?? She should have been fired for her actions!
What is the matter DPD? I agree with black bart, sounds like DPD has an axe to grind with the firefighters union. I can understand your bitterness and outspoken “modus” however I can’t understand your wife’s vocal attack on unions. Isn’t she working for of one of our largest unions?? She should have been fired for her actions!
What is the matter DPD? I agree with black bart, sounds like DPD has an axe to grind with the firefighters union. I can understand your bitterness and outspoken “modus” however I can’t understand your wife’s vocal attack on unions. Isn’t she working for of one of our largest unions?? She should have been fired for her actions!
What is the matter DPD? I agree with black bart, sounds like DPD has an axe to grind with the firefighters union. I can understand your bitterness and outspoken “modus” however I can’t understand your wife’s vocal attack on unions. Isn’t she working for of one of our largest unions?? She should have been fired for her actions!
Hmmm…looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Hmmm…looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Hmmm…looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Hmmm…looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.
Yes somehow, out of the 75 – 100 applicants the Grand Jury always seems to find politically motivated people to serve. Why don’t you shut your mouth and go serve yourself and find out what type of people are on the grand jury. Or better yet, the names are posted in the report. Show me where any of them donated any money in any election? Have any of the names of the Grand Jurors been involved with anything political before ever. I bet not. Until you show me proof, then you are nothing more than an angry union member to me.
Yes somehow, out of the 75 – 100 applicants the Grand Jury always seems to find politically motivated people to serve. Why don’t you shut your mouth and go serve yourself and find out what type of people are on the grand jury. Or better yet, the names are posted in the report. Show me where any of them donated any money in any election? Have any of the names of the Grand Jurors been involved with anything political before ever. I bet not. Until you show me proof, then you are nothing more than an angry union member to me.
Yes somehow, out of the 75 – 100 applicants the Grand Jury always seems to find politically motivated people to serve. Why don’t you shut your mouth and go serve yourself and find out what type of people are on the grand jury. Or better yet, the names are posted in the report. Show me where any of them donated any money in any election? Have any of the names of the Grand Jurors been involved with anything political before ever. I bet not. Until you show me proof, then you are nothing more than an angry union member to me.
Yes somehow, out of the 75 – 100 applicants the Grand Jury always seems to find politically motivated people to serve. Why don’t you shut your mouth and go serve yourself and find out what type of people are on the grand jury. Or better yet, the names are posted in the report. Show me where any of them donated any money in any election? Have any of the names of the Grand Jurors been involved with anything political before ever. I bet not. Until you show me proof, then you are nothing more than an angry union member to me.
DPD has been above board on this one. The only thing that looks, walks and quacks like a duck in this case is the over-reaching and excessive power of the FF union. Trying to put this off as sour grapes for campaign funding is off-base and unfair. DPD asked for an independent investigation. He did not condemn the fire dept. or even the union.
DPD has been above board on this one. The only thing that looks, walks and quacks like a duck in this case is the over-reaching and excessive power of the FF union. Trying to put this off as sour grapes for campaign funding is off-base and unfair. DPD asked for an independent investigation. He did not condemn the fire dept. or even the union.
DPD has been above board on this one. The only thing that looks, walks and quacks like a duck in this case is the over-reaching and excessive power of the FF union. Trying to put this off as sour grapes for campaign funding is off-base and unfair. DPD asked for an independent investigation. He did not condemn the fire dept. or even the union.
DPD has been above board on this one. The only thing that looks, walks and quacks like a duck in this case is the over-reaching and excessive power of the FF union. Trying to put this off as sour grapes for campaign funding is off-base and unfair. DPD asked for an independent investigation. He did not condemn the fire dept. or even the union.
“It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.”
You’re absolutely correct. I infiltrated the Grand Jury, dictated to them this report, and then forced the city manager to call for an independent investigation. This is all my doing and it is all sour grapes.
With these kind of responses, I can only come to one conclusion…
“It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.”
You’re absolutely correct. I infiltrated the Grand Jury, dictated to them this report, and then forced the city manager to call for an independent investigation. This is all my doing and it is all sour grapes.
With these kind of responses, I can only come to one conclusion…
“It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.”
You’re absolutely correct. I infiltrated the Grand Jury, dictated to them this report, and then forced the city manager to call for an independent investigation. This is all my doing and it is all sour grapes.
With these kind of responses, I can only come to one conclusion…
“It must be a duck. Cecila Escamillia Greenwald is not backed by Davis Firefighters Union in the last election and then her husband attacks them at every turn. Sounds like sour grapes to me.”
You’re absolutely correct. I infiltrated the Grand Jury, dictated to them this report, and then forced the city manager to call for an independent investigation. This is all my doing and it is all sour grapes.
With these kind of responses, I can only come to one conclusion…
Well, it seems I have struck a nerve. But sometimes even a, non- union, politically savy taxpayer of the city can stumble on the truth!
Well, it seems I have struck a nerve. But sometimes even a, non- union, politically savy taxpayer of the city can stumble on the truth!
Well, it seems I have struck a nerve. But sometimes even a, non- union, politically savy taxpayer of the city can stumble on the truth!
Well, it seems I have struck a nerve. But sometimes even a, non- union, politically savy taxpayer of the city can stumble on the truth!
DPD, You forgot to mention that you infiltrated the court system reviewing Yolo courts. Lol…
Please tell your wife to run again. She is a strong advocate for working people and isn’t afraid to speak up when somthing is not right. It’s not sour grapes. It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50. She did the right thing and the person pushing on this is probably a Davis FF. Keep up the great work.
DPD, You forgot to mention that you infiltrated the court system reviewing Yolo courts. Lol…
Please tell your wife to run again. She is a strong advocate for working people and isn’t afraid to speak up when somthing is not right. It’s not sour grapes. It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50. She did the right thing and the person pushing on this is probably a Davis FF. Keep up the great work.
DPD, You forgot to mention that you infiltrated the court system reviewing Yolo courts. Lol…
Please tell your wife to run again. She is a strong advocate for working people and isn’t afraid to speak up when somthing is not right. It’s not sour grapes. It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50. She did the right thing and the person pushing on this is probably a Davis FF. Keep up the great work.
DPD, You forgot to mention that you infiltrated the court system reviewing Yolo courts. Lol…
Please tell your wife to run again. She is a strong advocate for working people and isn’t afraid to speak up when somthing is not right. It’s not sour grapes. It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50. She did the right thing and the person pushing on this is probably a Davis FF. Keep up the great work.
Cecilia would probably have voted in favor of 3% at 50. It was not something the City of Davis dreamed up (can you say State of California?) No doubt, when budget “crisis” is thrown out there, people will do an about face (can you say the other Greenwald?) AND get your unfounded accusations correct, I just live in this city, I don’t work here!
Cecilia would probably have voted in favor of 3% at 50. It was not something the City of Davis dreamed up (can you say State of California?) No doubt, when budget “crisis” is thrown out there, people will do an about face (can you say the other Greenwald?) AND get your unfounded accusations correct, I just live in this city, I don’t work here!
Cecilia would probably have voted in favor of 3% at 50. It was not something the City of Davis dreamed up (can you say State of California?) No doubt, when budget “crisis” is thrown out there, people will do an about face (can you say the other Greenwald?) AND get your unfounded accusations correct, I just live in this city, I don’t work here!
Cecilia would probably have voted in favor of 3% at 50. It was not something the City of Davis dreamed up (can you say State of California?) No doubt, when budget “crisis” is thrown out there, people will do an about face (can you say the other Greenwald?) AND get your unfounded accusations correct, I just live in this city, I don’t work here!
Lead story in today’s Enterprise:
Independent probe of Fire Department ordered
Lead story in today’s Enterprise:
Independent probe of Fire Department ordered
Lead story in today’s Enterprise:
Independent probe of Fire Department ordered
Lead story in today’s Enterprise:
Independent probe of Fire Department ordered
“Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves.”
First, thanks to the person above who agreed with my original characterization.
Second, I’ll respond to your charges against me:
1. “someone who thinks all working people should make less money.”
I don’t believe that. I am a working person and I’d like to make more money.
In the private sector*, the market** (over time) sets wages based on productivity. No mystery there.
In the public sector, I would like to see elected officials who are charged with representing the taxpayers to negotiate the best deals they can in the interest of the taxpayers. And I fully believe that public employee unions, such as Local 3494, ought to fight as hard as they can for their members’ interests. What should not happen is that the elected officials take money from the unions and then give away the store.
2. “working people should … have no job protection.”
If this means that incompetent employees ought to hold their jobs, despite poor performance, then I agree. However, insofar as people have labor contracts which protect them from unjustified dismissal, I believe those contracts should be upheld. I don’t believe public agencies, including the university, ought to guarantee jobs with tenure, regardless of performance.
3. “working people should … buy their health benefits themselves.”
Yes, I do believe that. I think health insurance should be divorced from jobs*** and individuals (or organized collectives**** of individuals) should purchase health plans. Because I believe in universal health care, this would necessitate some kind of an added tax (presumably on business and higher income earners) and a subsidy to people unable to afford insurance.
* By private sector, I don’t include government contractors.
** In market cases where there is a monopoly — generally being a very strong union or a guild — the wages or benefits can be superinflated, even in the long-term. However, as we’ve seen in most unionized private industries in this country, the companies which employ this monopolistic labor have trouble surviving new competition and either fade away or severely adjust their labor practices. In cases where there is a monopsony — one buyer of labor — workers who are not unionized often get screwed, until they organize.
*** The tax code encourages employers to buy the health insurance now; and to change that incentive, the tax code would have to be changed.
**** Obviously, large groups of people could negotiate better terms for health care. As such, individuals should have the right to freely join collectives which would negotiate on their behalf.
“Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves.”
First, thanks to the person above who agreed with my original characterization.
Second, I’ll respond to your charges against me:
1. “someone who thinks all working people should make less money.”
I don’t believe that. I am a working person and I’d like to make more money.
In the private sector*, the market** (over time) sets wages based on productivity. No mystery there.
In the public sector, I would like to see elected officials who are charged with representing the taxpayers to negotiate the best deals they can in the interest of the taxpayers. And I fully believe that public employee unions, such as Local 3494, ought to fight as hard as they can for their members’ interests. What should not happen is that the elected officials take money from the unions and then give away the store.
2. “working people should … have no job protection.”
If this means that incompetent employees ought to hold their jobs, despite poor performance, then I agree. However, insofar as people have labor contracts which protect them from unjustified dismissal, I believe those contracts should be upheld. I don’t believe public agencies, including the university, ought to guarantee jobs with tenure, regardless of performance.
3. “working people should … buy their health benefits themselves.”
Yes, I do believe that. I think health insurance should be divorced from jobs*** and individuals (or organized collectives**** of individuals) should purchase health plans. Because I believe in universal health care, this would necessitate some kind of an added tax (presumably on business and higher income earners) and a subsidy to people unable to afford insurance.
* By private sector, I don’t include government contractors.
** In market cases where there is a monopoly — generally being a very strong union or a guild — the wages or benefits can be superinflated, even in the long-term. However, as we’ve seen in most unionized private industries in this country, the companies which employ this monopolistic labor have trouble surviving new competition and either fade away or severely adjust their labor practices. In cases where there is a monopsony — one buyer of labor — workers who are not unionized often get screwed, until they organize.
*** The tax code encourages employers to buy the health insurance now; and to change that incentive, the tax code would have to be changed.
**** Obviously, large groups of people could negotiate better terms for health care. As such, individuals should have the right to freely join collectives which would negotiate on their behalf.
“Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves.”
First, thanks to the person above who agreed with my original characterization.
Second, I’ll respond to your charges against me:
1. “someone who thinks all working people should make less money.”
I don’t believe that. I am a working person and I’d like to make more money.
In the private sector*, the market** (over time) sets wages based on productivity. No mystery there.
In the public sector, I would like to see elected officials who are charged with representing the taxpayers to negotiate the best deals they can in the interest of the taxpayers. And I fully believe that public employee unions, such as Local 3494, ought to fight as hard as they can for their members’ interests. What should not happen is that the elected officials take money from the unions and then give away the store.
2. “working people should … have no job protection.”
If this means that incompetent employees ought to hold their jobs, despite poor performance, then I agree. However, insofar as people have labor contracts which protect them from unjustified dismissal, I believe those contracts should be upheld. I don’t believe public agencies, including the university, ought to guarantee jobs with tenure, regardless of performance.
3. “working people should … buy their health benefits themselves.”
Yes, I do believe that. I think health insurance should be divorced from jobs*** and individuals (or organized collectives**** of individuals) should purchase health plans. Because I believe in universal health care, this would necessitate some kind of an added tax (presumably on business and higher income earners) and a subsidy to people unable to afford insurance.
* By private sector, I don’t include government contractors.
** In market cases where there is a monopoly — generally being a very strong union or a guild — the wages or benefits can be superinflated, even in the long-term. However, as we’ve seen in most unionized private industries in this country, the companies which employ this monopolistic labor have trouble surviving new competition and either fade away or severely adjust their labor practices. In cases where there is a monopsony — one buyer of labor — workers who are not unionized often get screwed, until they organize.
*** The tax code encourages employers to buy the health insurance now; and to change that incentive, the tax code would have to be changed.
**** Obviously, large groups of people could negotiate better terms for health care. As such, individuals should have the right to freely join collectives which would negotiate on their behalf.
“Anyone who cites Rifkin on public employee issues is getting in bed with someone who thinks all working people should make less money, have no job protection and should buy their health benefits themselves.”
First, thanks to the person above who agreed with my original characterization.
Second, I’ll respond to your charges against me:
1. “someone who thinks all working people should make less money.”
I don’t believe that. I am a working person and I’d like to make more money.
In the private sector*, the market** (over time) sets wages based on productivity. No mystery there.
In the public sector, I would like to see elected officials who are charged with representing the taxpayers to negotiate the best deals they can in the interest of the taxpayers. And I fully believe that public employee unions, such as Local 3494, ought to fight as hard as they can for their members’ interests. What should not happen is that the elected officials take money from the unions and then give away the store.
2. “working people should … have no job protection.”
If this means that incompetent employees ought to hold their jobs, despite poor performance, then I agree. However, insofar as people have labor contracts which protect them from unjustified dismissal, I believe those contracts should be upheld. I don’t believe public agencies, including the university, ought to guarantee jobs with tenure, regardless of performance.
3. “working people should … buy their health benefits themselves.”
Yes, I do believe that. I think health insurance should be divorced from jobs*** and individuals (or organized collectives**** of individuals) should purchase health plans. Because I believe in universal health care, this would necessitate some kind of an added tax (presumably on business and higher income earners) and a subsidy to people unable to afford insurance.
* By private sector, I don’t include government contractors.
** In market cases where there is a monopoly — generally being a very strong union or a guild — the wages or benefits can be superinflated, even in the long-term. However, as we’ve seen in most unionized private industries in this country, the companies which employ this monopolistic labor have trouble surviving new competition and either fade away or severely adjust their labor practices. In cases where there is a monopsony — one buyer of labor — workers who are not unionized often get screwed, until they organize.
*** The tax code encourages employers to buy the health insurance now; and to change that incentive, the tax code would have to be changed.
**** Obviously, large groups of people could negotiate better terms for health care. As such, individuals should have the right to freely join collectives which would negotiate on their behalf.
“It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50.”
Just so everyone understands where the law is: even if Cecilia and Rob had won office this year, they could not remove the 3%@50 provision from the city’s contracts with the DPD and the DFD. We are terminally stuck with that program.
It is illegal under state law to reduce a pension benefit for existing public employees, such as changing 3%@50 to 2.5%@60.
Further, under CalPERS policy, the city cannot have a contract which gives a lesser benefit to new hires and maintains 3%@50 for the existing workers.
As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.
“It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50.”
Just so everyone understands where the law is: even if Cecilia and Rob had won office this year, they could not remove the 3%@50 provision from the city’s contracts with the DPD and the DFD. We are terminally stuck with that program.
It is illegal under state law to reduce a pension benefit for existing public employees, such as changing 3%@50 to 2.5%@60.
Further, under CalPERS policy, the city cannot have a contract which gives a lesser benefit to new hires and maintains 3%@50 for the existing workers.
As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.
“It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50.”
Just so everyone understands where the law is: even if Cecilia and Rob had won office this year, they could not remove the 3%@50 provision from the city’s contracts with the DPD and the DFD. We are terminally stuck with that program.
It is illegal under state law to reduce a pension benefit for existing public employees, such as changing 3%@50 to 2.5%@60.
Further, under CalPERS policy, the city cannot have a contract which gives a lesser benefit to new hires and maintains 3%@50 for the existing workers.
As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.
“It’s accountability and we need more of it in government. She didn’t keep quiet just because us taxpayers had questions about the FFs getting 3% at 50.”
Just so everyone understands where the law is: even if Cecilia and Rob had won office this year, they could not remove the 3%@50 provision from the city’s contracts with the DPD and the DFD. We are terminally stuck with that program.
It is illegal under state law to reduce a pension benefit for existing public employees, such as changing 3%@50 to 2.5%@60.
Further, under CalPERS policy, the city cannot have a contract which gives a lesser benefit to new hires and maintains 3%@50 for the existing workers.
As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.
What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report? It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.
Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money. I stand corrected.
Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations. Myopia abounds.
What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report? It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.
Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money. I stand corrected.
Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations. Myopia abounds.
What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report? It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.
Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money. I stand corrected.
Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations. Myopia abounds.
What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report? It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.
Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money. I stand corrected.
Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations. Myopia abounds.
To the Above.
Rifkin is not engaging in union bashing. He is engaging in the realityu of the future.
To the Above.
Rifkin is not engaging in union bashing. He is engaging in the realityu of the future.
To the Above.
Rifkin is not engaging in union bashing. He is engaging in the realityu of the future.
To the Above.
Rifkin is not engaging in union bashing. He is engaging in the realityu of the future.
At least we should get some sort of response in within the next 90 days regarding the Fire Department.
Whatever happened to the Buzayan case? Or the DA investigation of Tahir Ahad?
We get all riled up and then…nothing.
At least we should get some sort of response in within the next 90 days regarding the Fire Department.
Whatever happened to the Buzayan case? Or the DA investigation of Tahir Ahad?
We get all riled up and then…nothing.
At least we should get some sort of response in within the next 90 days regarding the Fire Department.
Whatever happened to the Buzayan case? Or the DA investigation of Tahir Ahad?
We get all riled up and then…nothing.
At least we should get some sort of response in within the next 90 days regarding the Fire Department.
Whatever happened to the Buzayan case? Or the DA investigation of Tahir Ahad?
We get all riled up and then…nothing.
McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California? Prophet or profit?
McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California? Prophet or profit?
McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California? Prophet or profit?
McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California? Prophet or profit?
“What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report?”
I did not bring up the pension issue. I was responding to another person’s post, and simply to clarify that we really cannot change that reality, now.
“It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.”
In a generalized sense, you are wrong. However, there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city. I believe that most of the fault in the problems with Local 3494 (outside of what the grand jury found) lie with those charged to manage the fire department and negotiate with that union.
I don’t blame Local 3494 for trying to get all it can for its members. That’s its job. (I do think, though, it is unethical for city workers to fund city council candidates’ elections. No city workers other than firefighters gave any money to any candidates in the last 3 elections.)
“Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money.”
I’ve never said any such thing. I believe that the city needs to be cautious and responsible with its spending, lest it will harm the long-term interests of those workers not receiving undue benefits. And to this end, I have received phone calls, emails and in person messages from dozens of city workers who have applauded my reportage on the fire department. Those public employees fiercely disagree with Black Bart.
“Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations.”
I’m not familiar with the details of McCain’s plan. However, I know that Andy Stern, the president of the Service Employees International Union, the largest and fastest-growing union in the United States and Canada, exactly what I advocate with regard to health care.
“What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report?”
I did not bring up the pension issue. I was responding to another person’s post, and simply to clarify that we really cannot change that reality, now.
“It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.”
In a generalized sense, you are wrong. However, there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city. I believe that most of the fault in the problems with Local 3494 (outside of what the grand jury found) lie with those charged to manage the fire department and negotiate with that union.
I don’t blame Local 3494 for trying to get all it can for its members. That’s its job. (I do think, though, it is unethical for city workers to fund city council candidates’ elections. No city workers other than firefighters gave any money to any candidates in the last 3 elections.)
“Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money.”
I’ve never said any such thing. I believe that the city needs to be cautious and responsible with its spending, lest it will harm the long-term interests of those workers not receiving undue benefits. And to this end, I have received phone calls, emails and in person messages from dozens of city workers who have applauded my reportage on the fire department. Those public employees fiercely disagree with Black Bart.
“Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations.”
I’m not familiar with the details of McCain’s plan. However, I know that Andy Stern, the president of the Service Employees International Union, the largest and fastest-growing union in the United States and Canada, exactly what I advocate with regard to health care.
“What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report?”
I did not bring up the pension issue. I was responding to another person’s post, and simply to clarify that we really cannot change that reality, now.
“It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.”
In a generalized sense, you are wrong. However, there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city. I believe that most of the fault in the problems with Local 3494 (outside of what the grand jury found) lie with those charged to manage the fire department and negotiate with that union.
I don’t blame Local 3494 for trying to get all it can for its members. That’s its job. (I do think, though, it is unethical for city workers to fund city council candidates’ elections. No city workers other than firefighters gave any money to any candidates in the last 3 elections.)
“Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money.”
I’ve never said any such thing. I believe that the city needs to be cautious and responsible with its spending, lest it will harm the long-term interests of those workers not receiving undue benefits. And to this end, I have received phone calls, emails and in person messages from dozens of city workers who have applauded my reportage on the fire department. Those public employees fiercely disagree with Black Bart.
“Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations.”
I’m not familiar with the details of McCain’s plan. However, I know that Andy Stern, the president of the Service Employees International Union, the largest and fastest-growing union in the United States and Canada, exactly what I advocate with regard to health care.
“What is the relevance of the pension issue. I didn’t see anything about pensions in the GJ report?”
I did not bring up the pension issue. I was responding to another person’s post, and simply to clarify that we really cannot change that reality, now.
“It just shows that there is a union bashing element to this whole thing.”
In a generalized sense, you are wrong. However, there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city. I believe that most of the fault in the problems with Local 3494 (outside of what the grand jury found) lie with those charged to manage the fire department and negotiate with that union.
I don’t blame Local 3494 for trying to get all it can for its members. That’s its job. (I do think, though, it is unethical for city workers to fund city council candidates’ elections. No city workers other than firefighters gave any money to any candidates in the last 3 elections.)
“Rifkin apparently only thinks people working in the public sector should make less money.”
I’ve never said any such thing. I believe that the city needs to be cautious and responsible with its spending, lest it will harm the long-term interests of those workers not receiving undue benefits. And to this end, I have received phone calls, emails and in person messages from dozens of city workers who have applauded my reportage on the fire department. Those public employees fiercely disagree with Black Bart.
“Rifkin seems to have the same position on health care as John McCain as if individuals are the same kind of people as insurance corporations.”
I’m not familiar with the details of McCain’s plan. However, I know that Andy Stern, the president of the Service Employees International Union, the largest and fastest-growing union in the United States and Canada, exactly what I advocate with regard to health care.
“McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California?”
I think, barring a massive turnout of Democratic Hispanics for McCain (which seems highly unlikely to me), Obama should have no trouble carrying California. I’m not sure about this, but I think 1988 was the last election in which the Democrat did not win our state. And since 1992, California has easily gone to the Democrat.
It looks to me — and just about everyone I have read — that 2008 will be a big Democratic year and that Obama should win. However, if Senator Obama loses, I expect the difference would have to be Latino defections, which seemed to have hurt him in some of the primaries, including here.
“McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California?”
I think, barring a massive turnout of Democratic Hispanics for McCain (which seems highly unlikely to me), Obama should have no trouble carrying California. I’m not sure about this, but I think 1988 was the last election in which the Democrat did not win our state. And since 1992, California has easily gone to the Democrat.
It looks to me — and just about everyone I have read — that 2008 will be a big Democratic year and that Obama should win. However, if Senator Obama loses, I expect the difference would have to be Latino defections, which seemed to have hurt him in some of the primaries, including here.
“McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California?”
I think, barring a massive turnout of Democratic Hispanics for McCain (which seems highly unlikely to me), Obama should have no trouble carrying California. I’m not sure about this, but I think 1988 was the last election in which the Democrat did not win our state. And since 1992, California has easily gone to the Democrat.
It looks to me — and just about everyone I have read — that 2008 will be a big Democratic year and that Obama should win. However, if Senator Obama loses, I expect the difference would have to be Latino defections, which seemed to have hurt him in some of the primaries, including here.
“McCain Rifkin, think they will carry California?”
I think, barring a massive turnout of Democratic Hispanics for McCain (which seems highly unlikely to me), Obama should have no trouble carrying California. I’m not sure about this, but I think 1988 was the last election in which the Democrat did not win our state. And since 1992, California has easily gone to the Democrat.
It looks to me — and just about everyone I have read — that 2008 will be a big Democratic year and that Obama should win. However, if Senator Obama loses, I expect the difference would have to be Latino defections, which seemed to have hurt him in some of the primaries, including here.
“As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.”
Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!
“As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.”
Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!
“As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.”
Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!
“As such, unless the law is changed at the state level or at PERS, we are stuck with 3%@50 for all cops and firefighters; and we are stuck with 2.5%@55 for all other city of Davis employees.”
Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!
Rifkin said:
“In a general sense, you are wrong. However there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city.”
Actually in a general sense I am right. Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?
Without going into much detail about how the teachers salary and benefits have been negotiated together ever since collective bargaining began let me just put how I perceive you in simple terms.
In the private sector a labor contract is negotiated between workers and employers and nobody else really has much to say about it. However, in the public sector everyone who pays a penny in taxes can claim an interest and sound off about it. Thankfully, only elected officials vote on the public labor contracts. The citizens vote on the elected officials.
We, of course, just had an election to choose those leaders and the Fire Department contracts were an issue in that campaign. So it would seem that the voters spoke on this issue on election day.
Still as a taxpaying citizen it is your right to stick your opinionated nose into every public sector employee contract even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious and your ignorance of the long history of those contracts evolution is palpable.
Rifkin said:
“In a general sense, you are wrong. However there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city.”
Actually in a general sense I am right. Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?
Without going into much detail about how the teachers salary and benefits have been negotiated together ever since collective bargaining began let me just put how I perceive you in simple terms.
In the private sector a labor contract is negotiated between workers and employers and nobody else really has much to say about it. However, in the public sector everyone who pays a penny in taxes can claim an interest and sound off about it. Thankfully, only elected officials vote on the public labor contracts. The citizens vote on the elected officials.
We, of course, just had an election to choose those leaders and the Fire Department contracts were an issue in that campaign. So it would seem that the voters spoke on this issue on election day.
Still as a taxpaying citizen it is your right to stick your opinionated nose into every public sector employee contract even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious and your ignorance of the long history of those contracts evolution is palpable.
Rifkin said:
“In a general sense, you are wrong. However there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city.”
Actually in a general sense I am right. Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?
Without going into much detail about how the teachers salary and benefits have been negotiated together ever since collective bargaining began let me just put how I perceive you in simple terms.
In the private sector a labor contract is negotiated between workers and employers and nobody else really has much to say about it. However, in the public sector everyone who pays a penny in taxes can claim an interest and sound off about it. Thankfully, only elected officials vote on the public labor contracts. The citizens vote on the elected officials.
We, of course, just had an election to choose those leaders and the Fire Department contracts were an issue in that campaign. So it would seem that the voters spoke on this issue on election day.
Still as a taxpaying citizen it is your right to stick your opinionated nose into every public sector employee contract even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious and your ignorance of the long history of those contracts evolution is palpable.
Rifkin said:
“In a general sense, you are wrong. However there has been some criticism of one particular union that bargains with the city.”
Actually in a general sense I am right. Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?
Without going into much detail about how the teachers salary and benefits have been negotiated together ever since collective bargaining began let me just put how I perceive you in simple terms.
In the private sector a labor contract is negotiated between workers and employers and nobody else really has much to say about it. However, in the public sector everyone who pays a penny in taxes can claim an interest and sound off about it. Thankfully, only elected officials vote on the public labor contracts. The citizens vote on the elected officials.
We, of course, just had an election to choose those leaders and the Fire Department contracts were an issue in that campaign. So it would seem that the voters spoke on this issue on election day.
Still as a taxpaying citizen it is your right to stick your opinionated nose into every public sector employee contract even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious and your ignorance of the long history of those contracts evolution is palpable.
jeez one can learn so much…I never knew that Public Works employees needed Gym space to sleep it off once they “get Don partying (don, you dirty dogg!)” (Not that I would ever suggest DPD add spell function for the lexiconically challenged)
seriously, a few points:
first- it seems someone wants a counterbalance to firefighter union negotiations that are coming up. Putting them on defense big time is a great tactic, I suppose…
second, though not touched on here- Eileen Samitz makes a good point about the perenial cry for a 4th fire station. If cost benes suggests less money better spent for an added medical response unit, that is big and good news. It should be looked into. (My own feeling is the downtown site, worth $$$, should be closed and sold. The site of the car wash and rental site at Covell and F should be ED-ed if necessary and made into the new firestation of three, that would leave downtown, less than a mile and a half straight shot down F, within 5 minute response and cover the “brown zone” currently at or beyond that limit elsewhere. Practically eliminates any chance of a negligence suit…)
third, if anyone thinks this is some Big Bucks scandal, they should be looking at public works deals being made in the old famed back rooms…there are two huge water works deals that growth will dictate get done, and in the next five years, or less. Maybe far far less. Who is going to make the “killing” on those?
last, Davis fire is a ‘soft target’. It has no teeth really to turn on its accusers. If the Grand Jury wanted to show guts it could take on the culture of fear and intimidation elsewhere. Like the one guards, using compliant career criminals, impose at Monroe. Start with a little survey of ex residents, and ‘truck on’ from there… (like to the listening in/recording of PD meetings with inmates in the facility…
…and while discussing: wwhy should law enforcement “secure” court records- there is an invite to abuse worse than packing then locking a hearing’s door)
Allowing even something only as bad as abughraib’s kindergarter to take root here is a threat to any one of us. A ham sandwich can get arrested for low mopery, after all, and indicted (as the old def lawyer proverb goes) by…
…a grand jury.
jeez one can learn so much…I never knew that Public Works employees needed Gym space to sleep it off once they “get Don partying (don, you dirty dogg!)” (Not that I would ever suggest DPD add spell function for the lexiconically challenged)
seriously, a few points:
first- it seems someone wants a counterbalance to firefighter union negotiations that are coming up. Putting them on defense big time is a great tactic, I suppose…
second, though not touched on here- Eileen Samitz makes a good point about the perenial cry for a 4th fire station. If cost benes suggests less money better spent for an added medical response unit, that is big and good news. It should be looked into. (My own feeling is the downtown site, worth $$$, should be closed and sold. The site of the car wash and rental site at Covell and F should be ED-ed if necessary and made into the new firestation of three, that would leave downtown, less than a mile and a half straight shot down F, within 5 minute response and cover the “brown zone” currently at or beyond that limit elsewhere. Practically eliminates any chance of a negligence suit…)
third, if anyone thinks this is some Big Bucks scandal, they should be looking at public works deals being made in the old famed back rooms…there are two huge water works deals that growth will dictate get done, and in the next five years, or less. Maybe far far less. Who is going to make the “killing” on those?
last, Davis fire is a ‘soft target’. It has no teeth really to turn on its accusers. If the Grand Jury wanted to show guts it could take on the culture of fear and intimidation elsewhere. Like the one guards, using compliant career criminals, impose at Monroe. Start with a little survey of ex residents, and ‘truck on’ from there… (like to the listening in/recording of PD meetings with inmates in the facility…
…and while discussing: wwhy should law enforcement “secure” court records- there is an invite to abuse worse than packing then locking a hearing’s door)
Allowing even something only as bad as abughraib’s kindergarter to take root here is a threat to any one of us. A ham sandwich can get arrested for low mopery, after all, and indicted (as the old def lawyer proverb goes) by…
…a grand jury.
jeez one can learn so much…I never knew that Public Works employees needed Gym space to sleep it off once they “get Don partying (don, you dirty dogg!)” (Not that I would ever suggest DPD add spell function for the lexiconically challenged)
seriously, a few points:
first- it seems someone wants a counterbalance to firefighter union negotiations that are coming up. Putting them on defense big time is a great tactic, I suppose…
second, though not touched on here- Eileen Samitz makes a good point about the perenial cry for a 4th fire station. If cost benes suggests less money better spent for an added medical response unit, that is big and good news. It should be looked into. (My own feeling is the downtown site, worth $$$, should be closed and sold. The site of the car wash and rental site at Covell and F should be ED-ed if necessary and made into the new firestation of three, that would leave downtown, less than a mile and a half straight shot down F, within 5 minute response and cover the “brown zone” currently at or beyond that limit elsewhere. Practically eliminates any chance of a negligence suit…)
third, if anyone thinks this is some Big Bucks scandal, they should be looking at public works deals being made in the old famed back rooms…there are two huge water works deals that growth will dictate get done, and in the next five years, or less. Maybe far far less. Who is going to make the “killing” on those?
last, Davis fire is a ‘soft target’. It has no teeth really to turn on its accusers. If the Grand Jury wanted to show guts it could take on the culture of fear and intimidation elsewhere. Like the one guards, using compliant career criminals, impose at Monroe. Start with a little survey of ex residents, and ‘truck on’ from there… (like to the listening in/recording of PD meetings with inmates in the facility…
…and while discussing: wwhy should law enforcement “secure” court records- there is an invite to abuse worse than packing then locking a hearing’s door)
Allowing even something only as bad as abughraib’s kindergarter to take root here is a threat to any one of us. A ham sandwich can get arrested for low mopery, after all, and indicted (as the old def lawyer proverb goes) by…
…a grand jury.
jeez one can learn so much…I never knew that Public Works employees needed Gym space to sleep it off once they “get Don partying (don, you dirty dogg!)” (Not that I would ever suggest DPD add spell function for the lexiconically challenged)
seriously, a few points:
first- it seems someone wants a counterbalance to firefighter union negotiations that are coming up. Putting them on defense big time is a great tactic, I suppose…
second, though not touched on here- Eileen Samitz makes a good point about the perenial cry for a 4th fire station. If cost benes suggests less money better spent for an added medical response unit, that is big and good news. It should be looked into. (My own feeling is the downtown site, worth $$$, should be closed and sold. The site of the car wash and rental site at Covell and F should be ED-ed if necessary and made into the new firestation of three, that would leave downtown, less than a mile and a half straight shot down F, within 5 minute response and cover the “brown zone” currently at or beyond that limit elsewhere. Practically eliminates any chance of a negligence suit…)
third, if anyone thinks this is some Big Bucks scandal, they should be looking at public works deals being made in the old famed back rooms…there are two huge water works deals that growth will dictate get done, and in the next five years, or less. Maybe far far less. Who is going to make the “killing” on those?
last, Davis fire is a ‘soft target’. It has no teeth really to turn on its accusers. If the Grand Jury wanted to show guts it could take on the culture of fear and intimidation elsewhere. Like the one guards, using compliant career criminals, impose at Monroe. Start with a little survey of ex residents, and ‘truck on’ from there… (like to the listening in/recording of PD meetings with inmates in the facility…
…and while discussing: wwhy should law enforcement “secure” court records- there is an invite to abuse worse than packing then locking a hearing’s door)
Allowing even something only as bad as abughraib’s kindergarter to take root here is a threat to any one of us. A ham sandwich can get arrested for low mopery, after all, and indicted (as the old def lawyer proverb goes) by…
…a grand jury.
No antipathy towards teacher or firefighters only antipathy towards those who are willing to sacrifice their integrity and that of coworkers, such as the fire chief and FF president Bobby Weist. Teachers are important to our children, their future and our community. Firefighters are valued, but we don’t need to put our city in a financial mess to show that we appreciate them. Don’t confuse the two.
No antipathy towards teacher or firefighters only antipathy towards those who are willing to sacrifice their integrity and that of coworkers, such as the fire chief and FF president Bobby Weist. Teachers are important to our children, their future and our community. Firefighters are valued, but we don’t need to put our city in a financial mess to show that we appreciate them. Don’t confuse the two.
No antipathy towards teacher or firefighters only antipathy towards those who are willing to sacrifice their integrity and that of coworkers, such as the fire chief and FF president Bobby Weist. Teachers are important to our children, their future and our community. Firefighters are valued, but we don’t need to put our city in a financial mess to show that we appreciate them. Don’t confuse the two.
No antipathy towards teacher or firefighters only antipathy towards those who are willing to sacrifice their integrity and that of coworkers, such as the fire chief and FF president Bobby Weist. Teachers are important to our children, their future and our community. Firefighters are valued, but we don’t need to put our city in a financial mess to show that we appreciate them. Don’t confuse the two.
looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume
after all, someone needs to be a scapegoat
remember the end of the The Maltese Falcon?
Gutman may have loved Wilmer “like a son”, but that didn’t prevent Gutman from sacrificing him when the logic of the act became irrefutable
–Richard Estes
looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume
after all, someone needs to be a scapegoat
remember the end of the The Maltese Falcon?
Gutman may have loved Wilmer “like a son”, but that didn’t prevent Gutman from sacrificing him when the logic of the act became irrefutable
–Richard Estes
looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume
after all, someone needs to be a scapegoat
remember the end of the The Maltese Falcon?
Gutman may have loved Wilmer “like a son”, but that didn’t prevent Gutman from sacrificing him when the logic of the act became irrefutable
–Richard Estes
looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume
after all, someone needs to be a scapegoat
remember the end of the The Maltese Falcon?
Gutman may have loved Wilmer “like a son”, but that didn’t prevent Gutman from sacrificing him when the logic of the act became irrefutable
–Richard Estes
ANOTHER VIEW: “Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!”
I wonder about this: I should have asked Melissa in the city manager’s office if bankruptcy would make a difference in this matter. As I understand it, it would not: but I concede I don’t know.
Also, I don’t think the city of Davis is apt to go bankrupt, at least not for another 10 years. And if you do get to that point, it will not be because of the generous pensions and early retirements, it will be because we have not successfully solved the (solvable) problem of unfunded retiree medical benefits.
ANOTHER VIEW: “Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!”
I wonder about this: I should have asked Melissa in the city manager’s office if bankruptcy would make a difference in this matter. As I understand it, it would not: but I concede I don’t know.
Also, I don’t think the city of Davis is apt to go bankrupt, at least not for another 10 years. And if you do get to that point, it will not be because of the generous pensions and early retirements, it will be because we have not successfully solved the (solvable) problem of unfunded retiree medical benefits.
ANOTHER VIEW: “Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!”
I wonder about this: I should have asked Melissa in the city manager’s office if bankruptcy would make a difference in this matter. As I understand it, it would not: but I concede I don’t know.
Also, I don’t think the city of Davis is apt to go bankrupt, at least not for another 10 years. And if you do get to that point, it will not be because of the generous pensions and early retirements, it will be because we have not successfully solved the (solvable) problem of unfunded retiree medical benefits.
ANOTHER VIEW: “Unless the city goes bankrupt – in which case a judge will get to renegotiate the contracts!!!”
I wonder about this: I should have asked Melissa in the city manager’s office if bankruptcy would make a difference in this matter. As I understand it, it would not: but I concede I don’t know.
Also, I don’t think the city of Davis is apt to go bankrupt, at least not for another 10 years. And if you do get to that point, it will not be because of the generous pensions and early retirements, it will be because we have not successfully solved the (solvable) problem of unfunded retiree medical benefits.
“Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?”
You are clever at changing the topic. You said there was a widespread attack on unions. That is not true. Yet to defend your point, you bring up my suggestion that one good alternative to firing teachers, union teachers mind you, would be to have all district employees temporarily give back one of their benefits, until the state budget mess is solved. How you then slander me by saying I have attacked all unions in a general way is ridiculous, incorrect and unfair.
“Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?”
You are clever at changing the topic. You said there was a widespread attack on unions. That is not true. Yet to defend your point, you bring up my suggestion that one good alternative to firing teachers, union teachers mind you, would be to have all district employees temporarily give back one of their benefits, until the state budget mess is solved. How you then slander me by saying I have attacked all unions in a general way is ridiculous, incorrect and unfair.
“Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?”
You are clever at changing the topic. You said there was a widespread attack on unions. That is not true. Yet to defend your point, you bring up my suggestion that one good alternative to firing teachers, union teachers mind you, would be to have all district employees temporarily give back one of their benefits, until the state budget mess is solved. How you then slander me by saying I have attacked all unions in a general way is ridiculous, incorrect and unfair.
“Did you forget about the post you made where you argued that to balance the school budget teachers should give up their health benefits and buy them on their own?”
You are clever at changing the topic. You said there was a widespread attack on unions. That is not true. Yet to defend your point, you bring up my suggestion that one good alternative to firing teachers, union teachers mind you, would be to have all district employees temporarily give back one of their benefits, until the state budget mess is solved. How you then slander me by saying I have attacked all unions in a general way is ridiculous, incorrect and unfair.
“even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious”
It’s kind of you to slander me personally while remaining anonymous. It just shows you don’t have the courage of your convctions. Nevertheless, I have no antipathy toward teachers or firefighters qua teachers and firefighters.
“even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious”
It’s kind of you to slander me personally while remaining anonymous. It just shows you don’t have the courage of your convctions. Nevertheless, I have no antipathy toward teachers or firefighters qua teachers and firefighters.
“even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious”
It’s kind of you to slander me personally while remaining anonymous. It just shows you don’t have the courage of your convctions. Nevertheless, I have no antipathy toward teachers or firefighters qua teachers and firefighters.
“even if your antipathy towards teachers and firefighters is so obvious”
It’s kind of you to slander me personally while remaining anonymous. It just shows you don’t have the courage of your convctions. Nevertheless, I have no antipathy toward teachers or firefighters qua teachers and firefighters.
“looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume”
You do realize, Richard, that she will receive a very healthy pension for the rest of her life when she retires from the Davis Fire Department. She won’t need “another job.”
I don’t know how many years Chief Conroy has been in the fire service. However, if it’s been 30 years, her pension should start in the $150,000 a year range plus COLAs. (In Davis, the fire chief does not get 3%@50, but 2.5%@55, like most other city employees.)
My guess is that she and her husband, a retired fire fighter, will have a higher income as retirees than 90% of working people.
“looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume”
You do realize, Richard, that she will receive a very healthy pension for the rest of her life when she retires from the Davis Fire Department. She won’t need “another job.”
I don’t know how many years Chief Conroy has been in the fire service. However, if it’s been 30 years, her pension should start in the $150,000 a year range plus COLAs. (In Davis, the fire chief does not get 3%@50, but 2.5%@55, like most other city employees.)
My guess is that she and her husband, a retired fire fighter, will have a higher income as retirees than 90% of working people.
“looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume”
You do realize, Richard, that she will receive a very healthy pension for the rest of her life when she retires from the Davis Fire Department. She won’t need “another job.”
I don’t know how many years Chief Conroy has been in the fire service. However, if it’s been 30 years, her pension should start in the $150,000 a year range plus COLAs. (In Davis, the fire chief does not get 3%@50, but 2.5%@55, like most other city employees.)
My guess is that she and her husband, a retired fire fighter, will have a higher income as retirees than 90% of working people.
“looks like Rose Conroy better start sending our her resume”
You do realize, Richard, that she will receive a very healthy pension for the rest of her life when she retires from the Davis Fire Department. She won’t need “another job.”
I don’t know how many years Chief Conroy has been in the fire service. However, if it’s been 30 years, her pension should start in the $150,000 a year range plus COLAs. (In Davis, the fire chief does not get 3%@50, but 2.5%@55, like most other city employees.)
My guess is that she and her husband, a retired fire fighter, will have a higher income as retirees than 90% of working people.
Hard to slander you Rifkin, you’re a very public person, complete with a newspaper column and a propensity to post your thoughts in public. Even so, I don’t really see how pointing out that you have a pattern of writing about how union people working in the public sector should get less and give back thngs comes to slander. To infer from that an antipathy towards these workers in general exists in your heart and mind is not much of a stretch. Please correct me if I am wrong as if I could hardly stop you. Maybe some of the many lawyers who write on this blog could judge the slanderability of my post. If someone who knows the law actually thinks its slander I’ll be happy to retract any slanderous statements I have made.
Hard to slander you Rifkin, you’re a very public person, complete with a newspaper column and a propensity to post your thoughts in public. Even so, I don’t really see how pointing out that you have a pattern of writing about how union people working in the public sector should get less and give back thngs comes to slander. To infer from that an antipathy towards these workers in general exists in your heart and mind is not much of a stretch. Please correct me if I am wrong as if I could hardly stop you. Maybe some of the many lawyers who write on this blog could judge the slanderability of my post. If someone who knows the law actually thinks its slander I’ll be happy to retract any slanderous statements I have made.
Hard to slander you Rifkin, you’re a very public person, complete with a newspaper column and a propensity to post your thoughts in public. Even so, I don’t really see how pointing out that you have a pattern of writing about how union people working in the public sector should get less and give back thngs comes to slander. To infer from that an antipathy towards these workers in general exists in your heart and mind is not much of a stretch. Please correct me if I am wrong as if I could hardly stop you. Maybe some of the many lawyers who write on this blog could judge the slanderability of my post. If someone who knows the law actually thinks its slander I’ll be happy to retract any slanderous statements I have made.
Hard to slander you Rifkin, you’re a very public person, complete with a newspaper column and a propensity to post your thoughts in public. Even so, I don’t really see how pointing out that you have a pattern of writing about how union people working in the public sector should get less and give back thngs comes to slander. To infer from that an antipathy towards these workers in general exists in your heart and mind is not much of a stretch. Please correct me if I am wrong as if I could hardly stop you. Maybe some of the many lawyers who write on this blog could judge the slanderability of my post. If someone who knows the law actually thinks its slander I’ll be happy to retract any slanderous statements I have made.
Webster’s: “a malicious, false, and defamatory statement”
You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.
Webster’s: “a malicious, false, and defamatory statement”
You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.
Webster’s: “a malicious, false, and defamatory statement”
You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.
Webster’s: “a malicious, false, and defamatory statement”
You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.
Really Rifkin I was just trying to point out a pattern in your writings. Somehow, and I am not quite sure what I did, I offended you. My guess is that pointing out this pattern has shocked you into facing your history of attacks on certain groups of workers in the public sector (is that better). And really, don’t you think you are a little thin skinned to be both so public and so easily offended? If you would convince me of my error I would be happy to retract as I did by adding the word public in a previous post.
Really Rifkin I was just trying to point out a pattern in your writings. Somehow, and I am not quite sure what I did, I offended you. My guess is that pointing out this pattern has shocked you into facing your history of attacks on certain groups of workers in the public sector (is that better). And really, don’t you think you are a little thin skinned to be both so public and so easily offended? If you would convince me of my error I would be happy to retract as I did by adding the word public in a previous post.
Really Rifkin I was just trying to point out a pattern in your writings. Somehow, and I am not quite sure what I did, I offended you. My guess is that pointing out this pattern has shocked you into facing your history of attacks on certain groups of workers in the public sector (is that better). And really, don’t you think you are a little thin skinned to be both so public and so easily offended? If you would convince me of my error I would be happy to retract as I did by adding the word public in a previous post.
Really Rifkin I was just trying to point out a pattern in your writings. Somehow, and I am not quite sure what I did, I offended you. My guess is that pointing out this pattern has shocked you into facing your history of attacks on certain groups of workers in the public sector (is that better). And really, don’t you think you are a little thin skinned to be both so public and so easily offended? If you would convince me of my error I would be happy to retract as I did by adding the word public in a previous post.
“You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.”
Rich, if you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen! It is as if anyone dares to disagree with you, then you attack them like a pit bull. Trust me, you were not legally slandered. A judge or jury would laugh you right out of the courtroom with that one. However, name calling does not become you.
“You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.”
Rich, if you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen! It is as if anyone dares to disagree with you, then you attack them like a pit bull. Trust me, you were not legally slandered. A judge or jury would laugh you right out of the courtroom with that one. However, name calling does not become you.
“You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.”
Rich, if you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen! It is as if anyone dares to disagree with you, then you attack them like a pit bull. Trust me, you were not legally slandered. A judge or jury would laugh you right out of the courtroom with that one. However, name calling does not become you.
“You have not legally slandered me. But your false accusations surely meet Webster’s definition, Bart. Your obvious intent is to mar my reputation by suggesting I stand for things which I clearly do not. You will have to live with yourself in your hole.”
Rich, if you can’t take the heat, then get out of the kitchen! It is as if anyone dares to disagree with you, then you attack them like a pit bull. Trust me, you were not legally slandered. A judge or jury would laugh you right out of the courtroom with that one. However, name calling does not become you.
Wow, just what the city needs, another expense of an independent investigator. Fire conroy and lower her pension for supporting illegal activity.
Wow, just what the city needs, another expense of an independent investigator. Fire conroy and lower her pension for supporting illegal activity.
Wow, just what the city needs, another expense of an independent investigator. Fire conroy and lower her pension for supporting illegal activity.
Wow, just what the city needs, another expense of an independent investigator. Fire conroy and lower her pension for supporting illegal activity.
TO RICH RIFKIN,
I agree with you once in a awhile and I must tell you your response was great and correct. One, about 20 years from now, MAYBE, mr. greenwald will be able to write an unbiased and accurate article. Thanks Rich…..
TO RICH RIFKIN,
I agree with you once in a awhile and I must tell you your response was great and correct. One, about 20 years from now, MAYBE, mr. greenwald will be able to write an unbiased and accurate article. Thanks Rich…..
TO RICH RIFKIN,
I agree with you once in a awhile and I must tell you your response was great and correct. One, about 20 years from now, MAYBE, mr. greenwald will be able to write an unbiased and accurate article. Thanks Rich…..
TO RICH RIFKIN,
I agree with you once in a awhile and I must tell you your response was great and correct. One, about 20 years from now, MAYBE, mr. greenwald will be able to write an unbiased and accurate article. Thanks Rich…..
DPD,
Overall you do a fine job with this blog. The Vanguard is a wonderful community resource which gives the public insight into issues and viewpoints not otherwise found elsewhere.
But I have a concern and that is on occasion you have a tendency to embellish your praise of others, especially those who you have from time to time legitimately criticized.
In this article you conclude:
“Once again Mayor Ruth Asmundson and City Manager Bill Emlen deserve tremendous credit for doing the right thing in this situation. They have the full confidence of the Vanguard as they move forward.”
In an earlier Vanguard article, following the release of the Grand Jury report, you rightfully criticized City Manager Bill Emlen for his initial statement casting doubt about the Grand Jury’s conclusions and accuracy regarding the Davis Fire Department or the Davis Firefighter’s Union, before Emlen or more importantly an independent investigation had even looked into the allegations to determine their validity. It is important to remember that if this alleged misconduct has been happening it has been happening during Emlen’s administration. Therefore, Emlen has a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation.
But now, several days later, after widespread concern and criticism of city management and its response has emerged within the community, from the press both print & TV, and from leaders such as Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent and thorough investigation only then does Bill Emlen finally do what he should have done from the beginning. Emlen deserves some credit for finally making the correct decision, but more importantly it needs to be acknowledged that he may not have come to that decision without feeling the pressure of the public, the press or political leaders. At this stage to give Emlen “tremendous credit” seems a real stretch. And because he was slow to do what was obviously the right thing to do from the start would it not be prudent to be cautious before pronouncing “full confidence” in both the process or the leadership of Emlen on this issue?
One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?
DPD,
Overall you do a fine job with this blog. The Vanguard is a wonderful community resource which gives the public insight into issues and viewpoints not otherwise found elsewhere.
But I have a concern and that is on occasion you have a tendency to embellish your praise of others, especially those who you have from time to time legitimately criticized.
In this article you conclude:
“Once again Mayor Ruth Asmundson and City Manager Bill Emlen deserve tremendous credit for doing the right thing in this situation. They have the full confidence of the Vanguard as they move forward.”
In an earlier Vanguard article, following the release of the Grand Jury report, you rightfully criticized City Manager Bill Emlen for his initial statement casting doubt about the Grand Jury’s conclusions and accuracy regarding the Davis Fire Department or the Davis Firefighter’s Union, before Emlen or more importantly an independent investigation had even looked into the allegations to determine their validity. It is important to remember that if this alleged misconduct has been happening it has been happening during Emlen’s administration. Therefore, Emlen has a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation.
But now, several days later, after widespread concern and criticism of city management and its response has emerged within the community, from the press both print & TV, and from leaders such as Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent and thorough investigation only then does Bill Emlen finally do what he should have done from the beginning. Emlen deserves some credit for finally making the correct decision, but more importantly it needs to be acknowledged that he may not have come to that decision without feeling the pressure of the public, the press or political leaders. At this stage to give Emlen “tremendous credit” seems a real stretch. And because he was slow to do what was obviously the right thing to do from the start would it not be prudent to be cautious before pronouncing “full confidence” in both the process or the leadership of Emlen on this issue?
One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?
DPD,
Overall you do a fine job with this blog. The Vanguard is a wonderful community resource which gives the public insight into issues and viewpoints not otherwise found elsewhere.
But I have a concern and that is on occasion you have a tendency to embellish your praise of others, especially those who you have from time to time legitimately criticized.
In this article you conclude:
“Once again Mayor Ruth Asmundson and City Manager Bill Emlen deserve tremendous credit for doing the right thing in this situation. They have the full confidence of the Vanguard as they move forward.”
In an earlier Vanguard article, following the release of the Grand Jury report, you rightfully criticized City Manager Bill Emlen for his initial statement casting doubt about the Grand Jury’s conclusions and accuracy regarding the Davis Fire Department or the Davis Firefighter’s Union, before Emlen or more importantly an independent investigation had even looked into the allegations to determine their validity. It is important to remember that if this alleged misconduct has been happening it has been happening during Emlen’s administration. Therefore, Emlen has a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation.
But now, several days later, after widespread concern and criticism of city management and its response has emerged within the community, from the press both print & TV, and from leaders such as Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent and thorough investigation only then does Bill Emlen finally do what he should have done from the beginning. Emlen deserves some credit for finally making the correct decision, but more importantly it needs to be acknowledged that he may not have come to that decision without feeling the pressure of the public, the press or political leaders. At this stage to give Emlen “tremendous credit” seems a real stretch. And because he was slow to do what was obviously the right thing to do from the start would it not be prudent to be cautious before pronouncing “full confidence” in both the process or the leadership of Emlen on this issue?
One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?
DPD,
Overall you do a fine job with this blog. The Vanguard is a wonderful community resource which gives the public insight into issues and viewpoints not otherwise found elsewhere.
But I have a concern and that is on occasion you have a tendency to embellish your praise of others, especially those who you have from time to time legitimately criticized.
In this article you conclude:
“Once again Mayor Ruth Asmundson and City Manager Bill Emlen deserve tremendous credit for doing the right thing in this situation. They have the full confidence of the Vanguard as they move forward.”
In an earlier Vanguard article, following the release of the Grand Jury report, you rightfully criticized City Manager Bill Emlen for his initial statement casting doubt about the Grand Jury’s conclusions and accuracy regarding the Davis Fire Department or the Davis Firefighter’s Union, before Emlen or more importantly an independent investigation had even looked into the allegations to determine their validity. It is important to remember that if this alleged misconduct has been happening it has been happening during Emlen’s administration. Therefore, Emlen has a vested interest in the outcome of the investigation.
But now, several days later, after widespread concern and criticism of city management and its response has emerged within the community, from the press both print & TV, and from leaders such as Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent and thorough investigation only then does Bill Emlen finally do what he should have done from the beginning. Emlen deserves some credit for finally making the correct decision, but more importantly it needs to be acknowledged that he may not have come to that decision without feeling the pressure of the public, the press or political leaders. At this stage to give Emlen “tremendous credit” seems a real stretch. And because he was slow to do what was obviously the right thing to do from the start would it not be prudent to be cautious before pronouncing “full confidence” in both the process or the leadership of Emlen on this issue?
One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?
“One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?”
That’s a bit more strongly worded than I’m comfortable with. From my perspective, I want people to do the right thing–even if it is not their first instinct. When they do what I think is the right thing, I think they deserve praise and credit.
Bill Emlen’s first response was a mistake, I think he understands that and I think he did the right thing in the end. I want to encourage people to do the right thing. I want to encourage people to at least tacitly acknowledge their mistakes.
Also I think Ruth Asmundson’s first response on this was a good response and she deserves credit for that.
BTW, check out tomorrow’s Aggie, it finally quotes Souza and Saylor. Both basically and generically express their support for the investigation.
“One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?”
That’s a bit more strongly worded than I’m comfortable with. From my perspective, I want people to do the right thing–even if it is not their first instinct. When they do what I think is the right thing, I think they deserve praise and credit.
Bill Emlen’s first response was a mistake, I think he understands that and I think he did the right thing in the end. I want to encourage people to do the right thing. I want to encourage people to at least tacitly acknowledge their mistakes.
Also I think Ruth Asmundson’s first response on this was a good response and she deserves credit for that.
BTW, check out tomorrow’s Aggie, it finally quotes Souza and Saylor. Both basically and generically express their support for the investigation.
“One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?”
That’s a bit more strongly worded than I’m comfortable with. From my perspective, I want people to do the right thing–even if it is not their first instinct. When they do what I think is the right thing, I think they deserve praise and credit.
Bill Emlen’s first response was a mistake, I think he understands that and I think he did the right thing in the end. I want to encourage people to do the right thing. I want to encourage people to at least tacitly acknowledge their mistakes.
Also I think Ruth Asmundson’s first response on this was a good response and she deserves credit for that.
BTW, check out tomorrow’s Aggie, it finally quotes Souza and Saylor. Both basically and generically express their support for the investigation.
“One wonders if due to the fact at times you are a strong and insightful critic of city management you feel compelled to overcompensate with exaggerated praise and questionable judgment when they finally do something right?”
That’s a bit more strongly worded than I’m comfortable with. From my perspective, I want people to do the right thing–even if it is not their first instinct. When they do what I think is the right thing, I think they deserve praise and credit.
Bill Emlen’s first response was a mistake, I think he understands that and I think he did the right thing in the end. I want to encourage people to do the right thing. I want to encourage people to at least tacitly acknowledge their mistakes.
Also I think Ruth Asmundson’s first response on this was a good response and she deserves credit for that.
BTW, check out tomorrow’s Aggie, it finally quotes Souza and Saylor. Both basically and generically express their support for the investigation.
DPD,
You say that the Aggie finally quotes Souza and Saylor. I think you meant to say that Souza and Saylor FINALLY respond to the grand jury report.
Saylor’s response is lame. It displays his lack of leadership. Instead of taking ownership of his comments he simply says, “I support the city manager’s independent review of these allegations to determine the accuracy of the charges and guide any necessary corrections or other actions.”
I’m sure that he believes that this protects his pocket from getting $$$ and future endor$ements from the Davis Firefighters.
The public is not dumb like they think. It’s quite apparent that they all rehearsed and I’m sure cleared their responses with the city manager and the fire department. They are all canned responses.
I’m glad to see that Ruth and Bill Emlen finally did the right thing in calling for an investigation. You were right to critique them initially and praise them when they did the right thing.
If Saylor were running the city at the time it would have been swept under the rug. I think it shows what we can expect, or not, when he is mayor.
DPD,
You say that the Aggie finally quotes Souza and Saylor. I think you meant to say that Souza and Saylor FINALLY respond to the grand jury report.
Saylor’s response is lame. It displays his lack of leadership. Instead of taking ownership of his comments he simply says, “I support the city manager’s independent review of these allegations to determine the accuracy of the charges and guide any necessary corrections or other actions.”
I’m sure that he believes that this protects his pocket from getting $$$ and future endor$ements from the Davis Firefighters.
The public is not dumb like they think. It’s quite apparent that they all rehearsed and I’m sure cleared their responses with the city manager and the fire department. They are all canned responses.
I’m glad to see that Ruth and Bill Emlen finally did the right thing in calling for an investigation. You were right to critique them initially and praise them when they did the right thing.
If Saylor were running the city at the time it would have been swept under the rug. I think it shows what we can expect, or not, when he is mayor.
DPD,
You say that the Aggie finally quotes Souza and Saylor. I think you meant to say that Souza and Saylor FINALLY respond to the grand jury report.
Saylor’s response is lame. It displays his lack of leadership. Instead of taking ownership of his comments he simply says, “I support the city manager’s independent review of these allegations to determine the accuracy of the charges and guide any necessary corrections or other actions.”
I’m sure that he believes that this protects his pocket from getting $$$ and future endor$ements from the Davis Firefighters.
The public is not dumb like they think. It’s quite apparent that they all rehearsed and I’m sure cleared their responses with the city manager and the fire department. They are all canned responses.
I’m glad to see that Ruth and Bill Emlen finally did the right thing in calling for an investigation. You were right to critique them initially and praise them when they did the right thing.
If Saylor were running the city at the time it would have been swept under the rug. I think it shows what we can expect, or not, when he is mayor.
DPD,
You say that the Aggie finally quotes Souza and Saylor. I think you meant to say that Souza and Saylor FINALLY respond to the grand jury report.
Saylor’s response is lame. It displays his lack of leadership. Instead of taking ownership of his comments he simply says, “I support the city manager’s independent review of these allegations to determine the accuracy of the charges and guide any necessary corrections or other actions.”
I’m sure that he believes that this protects his pocket from getting $$$ and future endor$ements from the Davis Firefighters.
The public is not dumb like they think. It’s quite apparent that they all rehearsed and I’m sure cleared their responses with the city manager and the fire department. They are all canned responses.
I’m glad to see that Ruth and Bill Emlen finally did the right thing in calling for an investigation. You were right to critique them initially and praise them when they did the right thing.
If Saylor were running the city at the time it would have been swept under the rug. I think it shows what we can expect, or not, when he is mayor.
Another problem with an independent Investigation is they have no subpoena power. How are they going to be able to subpoena emails and phone records and finance records? They cannot, which is another benefit of the Grand Jury.
Another problem with an independent Investigation is they have no subpoena power. How are they going to be able to subpoena emails and phone records and finance records? They cannot, which is another benefit of the Grand Jury.
Another problem with an independent Investigation is they have no subpoena power. How are they going to be able to subpoena emails and phone records and finance records? They cannot, which is another benefit of the Grand Jury.
Another problem with an independent Investigation is they have no subpoena power. How are they going to be able to subpoena emails and phone records and finance records? They cannot, which is another benefit of the Grand Jury.
DPD,
In my initial post, I agreed with you that giving Bill Emlen some credit for finally doing the right thing was appropriate.
But what neither you or Seeking Transparency @ 7:24 AM seem to understand is that my criticism of your article was specifically related to your hyperbole of giving exaggerated credit to Emlen.
Your pronouncement that Emlen deserved “tremendous” credit for finally doing the right thing seems silly. Had he initially called for a thorough and independent investigation and made no comment whatsoever about the validity of the allegations he might have earned “tremendous” credit. But since he only did the right thing after receiving significant public criticism shows his instinct was not to take the charges seriously and instead deflect and attack the messenger.
Following his change of course, your judgment that Emlen has your “full confidence” is premature if not flawed in light of the fact we do not know what the process will be or who he will select to conduct the “independent” investigation.
Again, I agreed that some credit should be given to Emlen for finally doing the right thing. My point is that the credit was not worthy of “tremendous” credit nor did this change in policy direction foster a belief deserving of “full confidence.”
Again, Mr. Emlen’s first reaction was to criticize and diminish the Grand Jury report. He did not initially agree to an independent investigation and only did so after strong criticism from the Vanguard, the press, the public and Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent investigation.
With both Heystek and Mayor Ruth Asmundson publicly expressing their concerns about the allegations Emlen reversed himself. It is likely that the public comments by two of his bosses caused him to reverse course, not his own judgment.
Finally, it will be interesting to see what is announced during or following the July 15 City Council meeting in which Agenda Item 1 is:
Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Govt. Code §54957.6
Agency Designated Representative: Bill Emlen, City Manager
Employee Organization: Firefighters Local 3494
DPD,
In my initial post, I agreed with you that giving Bill Emlen some credit for finally doing the right thing was appropriate.
But what neither you or Seeking Transparency @ 7:24 AM seem to understand is that my criticism of your article was specifically related to your hyperbole of giving exaggerated credit to Emlen.
Your pronouncement that Emlen deserved “tremendous” credit for finally doing the right thing seems silly. Had he initially called for a thorough and independent investigation and made no comment whatsoever about the validity of the allegations he might have earned “tremendous” credit. But since he only did the right thing after receiving significant public criticism shows his instinct was not to take the charges seriously and instead deflect and attack the messenger.
Following his change of course, your judgment that Emlen has your “full confidence” is premature if not flawed in light of the fact we do not know what the process will be or who he will select to conduct the “independent” investigation.
Again, I agreed that some credit should be given to Emlen for finally doing the right thing. My point is that the credit was not worthy of “tremendous” credit nor did this change in policy direction foster a belief deserving of “full confidence.”
Again, Mr. Emlen’s first reaction was to criticize and diminish the Grand Jury report. He did not initially agree to an independent investigation and only did so after strong criticism from the Vanguard, the press, the public and Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent investigation.
With both Heystek and Mayor Ruth Asmundson publicly expressing their concerns about the allegations Emlen reversed himself. It is likely that the public comments by two of his bosses caused him to reverse course, not his own judgment.
Finally, it will be interesting to see what is announced during or following the July 15 City Council meeting in which Agenda Item 1 is:
Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Govt. Code §54957.6
Agency Designated Representative: Bill Emlen, City Manager
Employee Organization: Firefighters Local 3494
DPD,
In my initial post, I agreed with you that giving Bill Emlen some credit for finally doing the right thing was appropriate.
But what neither you or Seeking Transparency @ 7:24 AM seem to understand is that my criticism of your article was specifically related to your hyperbole of giving exaggerated credit to Emlen.
Your pronouncement that Emlen deserved “tremendous” credit for finally doing the right thing seems silly. Had he initially called for a thorough and independent investigation and made no comment whatsoever about the validity of the allegations he might have earned “tremendous” credit. But since he only did the right thing after receiving significant public criticism shows his instinct was not to take the charges seriously and instead deflect and attack the messenger.
Following his change of course, your judgment that Emlen has your “full confidence” is premature if not flawed in light of the fact we do not know what the process will be or who he will select to conduct the “independent” investigation.
Again, I agreed that some credit should be given to Emlen for finally doing the right thing. My point is that the credit was not worthy of “tremendous” credit nor did this change in policy direction foster a belief deserving of “full confidence.”
Again, Mr. Emlen’s first reaction was to criticize and diminish the Grand Jury report. He did not initially agree to an independent investigation and only did so after strong criticism from the Vanguard, the press, the public and Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent investigation.
With both Heystek and Mayor Ruth Asmundson publicly expressing their concerns about the allegations Emlen reversed himself. It is likely that the public comments by two of his bosses caused him to reverse course, not his own judgment.
Finally, it will be interesting to see what is announced during or following the July 15 City Council meeting in which Agenda Item 1 is:
Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Govt. Code §54957.6
Agency Designated Representative: Bill Emlen, City Manager
Employee Organization: Firefighters Local 3494
DPD,
In my initial post, I agreed with you that giving Bill Emlen some credit for finally doing the right thing was appropriate.
But what neither you or Seeking Transparency @ 7:24 AM seem to understand is that my criticism of your article was specifically related to your hyperbole of giving exaggerated credit to Emlen.
Your pronouncement that Emlen deserved “tremendous” credit for finally doing the right thing seems silly. Had he initially called for a thorough and independent investigation and made no comment whatsoever about the validity of the allegations he might have earned “tremendous” credit. But since he only did the right thing after receiving significant public criticism shows his instinct was not to take the charges seriously and instead deflect and attack the messenger.
Following his change of course, your judgment that Emlen has your “full confidence” is premature if not flawed in light of the fact we do not know what the process will be or who he will select to conduct the “independent” investigation.
Again, I agreed that some credit should be given to Emlen for finally doing the right thing. My point is that the credit was not worthy of “tremendous” credit nor did this change in policy direction foster a belief deserving of “full confidence.”
Again, Mr. Emlen’s first reaction was to criticize and diminish the Grand Jury report. He did not initially agree to an independent investigation and only did so after strong criticism from the Vanguard, the press, the public and Councilmember Lamar Heystek calling for an independent investigation.
With both Heystek and Mayor Ruth Asmundson publicly expressing their concerns about the allegations Emlen reversed himself. It is likely that the public comments by two of his bosses caused him to reverse course, not his own judgment.
Finally, it will be interesting to see what is announced during or following the July 15 City Council meeting in which Agenda Item 1 is:
Closed Session: Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Govt. Code §54957.6
Agency Designated Representative: Bill Emlen, City Manager
Employee Organization: Firefighters Local 3494