Atherton: Layoffs delayed while talks continue Atherton, posted by Editor, The Almanac Online, on Jun 9, 2011 at 9:48 pm
The town of Atherton agreed on Thursday (June 9) to delay its planned layoff of 13 employees until July 15 while it negotiates with the union representing them, according to Teamsters union representative Peter Finn.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, June 9, 2011, 6:39 PM
Posted by Unfair, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 9, 2011 at 10:48 pm
How unfair it is to put all the cost savings burden on the backs of these 13 employees when no police employee is being asked to make any concession. This is creating an untenable situation in the organization. Even if these 13 employees stay on, the natural level of resentment created by such a maneuver will poison the organization.
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 11:41 am
Danielson buddies up with the police, just like he did in the City of Elk Grove. Danielson was even indicted for allowing police officers who were also council members to vote on police issues. See for yourselves. Look on page 131 to see the ruling.
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 2:45 pm
Just remember that a structural deficit is forever unless long term changes are made in either revenues or expenses. We can suffer the pain of expense reductions now or kick the hard decisions down the road and have an even bigger problem next year.
While a few support an even bigger parcel tax I suggest that the overwhelming outrage to the recent garbage fee increases pints yo a hard time for renewing much less increasing the current parcel tax.
Living within the Town's income is the first responsibility of the Council and the Town Manager.
Posted by Thelma, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 3:48 pm
Peter--I hope you have looked very carefully at Muffy's link to Danialson's Grand Jury indictment over over Law Enforcement/Council Member/Conflict of interest issues from his most recent position as a City Manager.
Are you sure this is the guy to fix any of Atherton's problems? Financial or otherwise?
Renee and Tom--please tell me you have checked the link.
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 4:48 pm
We need to quit living in a dream world. The Council kicked the can down the road by setting garbage rates below the true cost under citizen pressure. If the Council now kicks the ever growing personnel costs down the road we will soon have a $3 million/year structural deficit. That would mean a parcel tax of $1,200 just to balance the budget.
There is no Santa Clause and Atherton cannot print money.
Posted by Thelma, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 5:36 pm
Peter would you consider making a presentation at a Council Meeting on possible ways for Atherton to live within it's means pertaining to Police service options? The public needs time and information before it can get comfortable with this necessary and long overdue re-evaluation about what we need, what we can afford, and the different ways there are to achieve those goals.
It needs to done fairly quickly, as the fear mongers are well underway spinning a larger parcel tax and anonymous gifts which will only dress up the structural problem you have referred to.
I can't think of anyone who might be able to do a better job at this than you.
Posted by POGO, a resident of the Woodside: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 5:40 pm
Muffy S stated, "Danielson was even indicted for allowing police officers who were also council members to vote on police issues."
Since when does a City Manager "allow" a council member to vote? Council members recuse themselves or not. The rest of the council can ask a fellow council member to recuse themselves or they can censure them. The city attorney can alert the conflicted council member of the conflict but no one, especially not a city manager, can stop them.
Posted by Bob , a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 6:48 pm
It's my understanding that the building department takes in as much as it spends. If not raise the fees. Or tell me where the rainy day fund is and why it can't be used if there is a shortfall. I find the Atherton building department to be professional, courteous, timely and knowledgeable. Outsourcing is a mistake, and may become self fulfilling for the company that gets the contract. Can anyone comment on this from experience.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 7:41 pm
I can comment from experience. I build in your town and so have frequent contact with your building department. They are professional and knowledgeable and, if you aren't trying to put one over on them, friendly. The department also serves a variety of functions, such as taking in business licenses and a variety of other things I can guarantee an outsourced building services company will not. The bottom line is concessions can be garnered from these departments which will help off set deficits. The real cost to your town is in your police department. They create a much larger structural deficit than the building and planning departments not to mention the fact they have cost you dearly in lawsuits. In my opinion, with the current leadership and lack of independent oversight will continue to cost you in lawsuits.
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 8:25 pm
The Grand Jury Report Reads:
The City Manager is the administrative head of the City government, and is responsible for the operation of all City departments. He serves at the pleasure of the Council. The current City Manager, Mr. John Danielson, has served since 2001. He prepares the agenda for the Council meetings, briefs the Council members before the meetings and has great influence over the process used by the Council in its deliberations.
The City Manager was well aware that Mr. Cooper and Mr. Leary were strongly resisting advice to strictly adhere to conflict of interest requirements, and that they were very antagonistic towards the City Attorney with respect to this issue. In an attempt to address
the conflict issue in October of 2001 the City Manager provided an outside legal opinion from the McDonough legal firm. The opinion was prepared without the knowledge of the City Attorney, so that the two Council members would know that it was independent
of Mr. Manzenetti’s legal opinions.
The City Manager knew that conflict of interest problems relative to law enforcement services occurred repeatedly. He was aware that conflict of interest requirements were not being observed. He could have, but did not, establish a process to ensure that conflict
of interest issues were dealt with explicitly and in accordance with the law. In addition to the many times when the Council explicitly considered issues related to the Agreement for Law Enforcement Services, there were instances in which law enforcement issues were commingled with other budget issues in a single vote. Votes on
the law enforcement budget items were included within the total municipal budget on October 4, 2000, July 11, 2001, June 5, 2002, and June 4, 2003. Each of these appears to have been a violation of the conflict of interest requirements of section 1090. The City
Manager should have ensured that issues related to the Agreement for Law Enforcement Services were separated from other Council actions so that the members with conflicts could recuse themselves and avoid voting inappropriately.
Sometimes you just have to spell it out in order for people to get it!
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 8:40 pm
Here's some more FACTS to chew on:
When Danielson first started for the "new" City of Elk Grove his friend Kashiwagi (who now sits as Director of the PWD in Atherton) started a company called Interwest Consulting for outsourcing and worked with Danielson for years. When Danielson started working for the "new "city of Wildomar he hired Kashiwagi and then used Interwest Consulting staffing. Now Danielson is in Atherton, hires Kashiwagi (Interwest Consulting) to do the "management analysis" for the PWD/bldg/admin at the cost of $12K, and then Kashiwagi slides right into Duncan Jones seat. By the way, Duncan Jones is retiring to Incline Village and it just so happens Danielson used to work there years ago. Does anyone see where this is going? Does the council know all this with their extensive background check?
My opinion is he is scamming everyone using Interwest Consulting and he has been getting away with it for years. This is big bucks to be made in outsourcing!
Posted by Thelma, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 9:06 pm
Peter I am both appreciative and aware of these statistics that you have posted on multiple Almanac threads.
But--I was thinking that the only way that the print press will ever report on this stuff is IF and AFTER, it is brought up in a substantive way at a public meeting--never from off of this forum.
Since the Council is too afraid of catching elephantiasis to deal with their cancer problem on their own, I was thinking it may need to publicly addressed for them, by some brave and prominent citizen. Only then might an even braver reporter or two be able to start reporting and get the story out for the public to begin to consider.
It's a lot harder to ignore the hungry elephant in the room when it's right next to a power point presentation on elephants, with the peanut supply on the agenda, with press in attendance and a big blue elephant filming the whole thing.
You are one of a very few who could be effective at this task.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2011 at 9:10 pm
"why don't use (sic) ask Danielson? Preferably face to face. And then share his answer with the Forum readers."
Because I'm not a citizen of your town. Why don't you? You seem to be extremely involved in what is going on in your town yet you refuse to acknowledge that the biggest cost to your town, both structural and in lawsuits is not even being acknowledged let alone addressed by your "hero" Danielsen. If Danielsen was doing anything but picking low hanging fruit he would be going after outsourcing your PD, yet he's not. Why? I find it very interesting you are defending him on this issue when you have repeatedly stated you think outsourcing police services in Atherton is a good idea. I also find the "Elk Grove Connection" interesting. Isn't Elk Grove where the "chief" that did the "independant" investigation of the falsified police report came from? Odd coincindence?
Posted by POGO, a resident of the Woodside: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 7:29 am
The comments by Muffy S about Mr. Danielson are so unfounded and exaggerated they border on obscene.
Yes, I have read the Grand Jury Report. I will have two posts, this one, to provide a very brief summary of the issue and conclusions and a second post with a SINGLE QUESTION for Muffy. Let's see if she answers.
The Sacramento County Grand Jury issued a lengthy report in June 2005. The report covered a variety of issues including complaints about taxi service, dangerous conditions with students walking to school at Inderkum High School and landscaping in Folsom. You see, this was the CIVIL GRAND JURY, NOT THE CRIMINAL GRAND JURY.
Also included in that report was an investigation into problems in Elk Grove. As has been noted, there were two Council Members who were members of the Sheriff's Department and they had a conflict of interest. They ended up voting on many issues that impacted the Sheriff's Department which was a clear conflict of interest. The report clearly acknowledges that these two conflicted Council Members were bullies, profane, vulgar, disrespectful to staff and colleagues, and refused to accept any admonitions about their conflict from any other Council Members, the City Attorney or the City Manager (Mr. Danielson). The report says that the City Attorney and City Manager repeated noted the conflict and raised the issue, brought it to everyone's attention and subjected the council to a dozen tutorials on conflicts of interest.
The report made several recommendations of what COULD HAVE and SHOULD HAVE been done, but clearly places the main fault with the two boorish Council Members. The only recommendation directed specifically to Mr. Danielson, was that he COULD have removed issues related to the Sheriff's Department from the Council's budget so the two conflicted Council Members COULD have recused themselves. There is no evidence that given this opportunity that the two Council Members WOULD have recused themselves, in fact, there is ample evidence they would have ignored it.
But Muffy takes the opportunity to paint Mr. Danielson as a culprit in this episode. Ironically, the report makes the far more compelling point that public employees have a clear conflict to serve their own self-interest.
My one question to Muffy follows in the next post.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 8:19 am
you state and have stated repeatedly that there is no support for outsourcing the APD. Where do you get your data? An outdated and arguably flawed survey? Outsourcing police services is the best way to save Atherton money yet Danielsen hasn't even brought it up. Why? Why has he not even presented the possibility to the council? I repeat, because he's picking the low hanging fruit. Going after the APD is ging to be hard and require effort. If Danielsen is the savior you make him out to be at the very least he would bring it up.
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 9:33 am
You always seem to be on the wrong side of the argument. Always trying to skew the facts. It's my opinion through research that Danielson is a "self-serving" public servant. You are trying to argue with me about the facts. I didn't write the Grand Jury report - a judge did. Danielson did get into trouble. He did overlook what was going on, which was a conflict of intererst, which is against the law and more importantly he did not protect the interest of the public.
Now, do you have anything to say to me about Danielson track record about Kashiwagi and Interwest Conculting. I would love to hear your take on this. Thank you.
Posted by POGO, a resident of the Woodside: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 10:01 am
Actually, no, Muffy, I will not answer your question until you answer mine.
You said Mr. Danielson was INDICTED. I didn't find that anywhere in the document that YOU referenced.
I was willing to give you the benefit that you "misspoke," but given the gravity of your charge and the fact that you have now doubled-down, I'll wait to hear your clarification, explanation or apology.
Your posts of full of false statements and exaggerations. Shameful, actually.
Posted by POGO, a resident of the Woodside: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 10:16 am
Michael Stogner -
I think you know that I respect and admire your work as a victim's advocate.
That said, I take issue with your statement "(t)he report does show that he (Mr. Danielson) has had years of personal experiences of Police Officers/Council Members breaking the law right in front of him, and he did not stop it."
The grand jury report actually notes that Mr. Danielson and the City Attorney took NUMEROUS steps to try to resolve the conflict of interest of the two Council Members. Mr. Danielson and the City Attorney noted the conflict, brought it up in open session, spoke with other Council Members and even convened several tutorials for the council about this issue. Unfortunately, the two Council Members were boorish, profane bullies and they simply refused to acknowledge the conflict or recuse themselves.
It is almost impossible to STOP any elected official from voting EVEN WHEN THEY HAVE A CLEAR CONFLICT OF INTEREST. It is up to the individual council member to recuse themselves, no one else. No City Attorney or City Manager has the power or authority to stop any elected official from voting, period. The grand jury report echoes that.
If a council member refuses to acknowledge their conflict, the other elected members of their body MAY determine the conflict and choose to ignore the conflicted officials vote. This is a very dangerous and rarely used process because it is simply to easy for a small group of officials to get rid of their adversaries.
Can you imagine if the Democrats in our state Assembly (who have a majority) could just vote to "conflict out" even one Republican colleague? They could pass any tax they wanted.
No, the report makes it clear that the culprits were the two conflicted Council Members. The only thing they said Mr. Danielson could do was separate the law enforcement issues from other items on the agenda. That would only have solved the problem if the two conflicted Council Members would have recused themselves from those items. Mr. Danielson did the best he could under the situation.
The reason there was an investigation in the first place was because everyone was powerless to resolve the matter.
Posted by Thomas (Sharon Heights), a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 10:53 am Thomas (Sharon Heights) is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
Muffy your posts are all old news. Reference the article in The Almanac dated 2/24/11:
"Atherton Hires Efficiency Expert to Scrutinize Operations"
The cost for Interwest was actually funded by the "salary savings in the city manager's office" when Mr. Danielson was hired.
The Grand Jury Report is also old news and has been referenced previously on this forum by others that have attempted to discredit the new city manager..or more specifically the town council's decision. POGO is actually right...to suggest that Mr. Danielson was indicted when it is not true is irresponsible and you should "chew on" your facts a bit more before you publish false statements.
Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community, on Jun 11, 2011 at 11:28 am
"That said, I take issue with your statement "(t)he report does show that he (Mr. Danielson) has had years of personal experiences of Police Officers/Council Members breaking the law right in front of him, and he did not stop it."
I agree with you on this issue....I should have said this is my interpretation of the GJ report. I do believe there was more he could have done to stop it, but anyone who reads this report will realize what a HUGE job that would have been for anyone to take on.
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Muffy is just one example of the anonymous posters who feel free to make unfounded and libelous statements on this Forum knowing full well that they will not be held accountable. For them it is perfectly acceptable to yell for others to be held accountable but, oh no, not them. I love all these folks wearing white hoods yelling "Hang Him".
MV keeps asking for data. I have never claimed that there is data one way or the other. PLEASE read my numerous statements carefully -
1 "to my knowledge no one else has publicly endorsed the outsourcing of police services"
2 - "have repeatedly expressed my opinion as to why the Town should outsource its police services and my opinion as to why the political realities weigh against doing so."
3 - "I have consistently advocated outsourcing police services to the Sheriff but so far I am the only Atherton resident who has publicly advocated such a move to the Town Council - hardly an overwhelming mandate."
4 - "I am the only person who has made such a proposal to the Town Council. No one supported my proposal. Many residents have spoken against it."
Please read my comments before asking the same question time and time again.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 1:56 pm
go back and reread my question. It was "Outsourcing police services is the best way to save Atherton money yet Danielsen hasn't even brought it up. Why? Why has he not even presented the possibility to the council?"
"2 - "have repeatedly expressed my opinion as to why the Town should outsource its police services and my opinion as to why the political realities weigh against doing so.""
What "political realities?" On what do you base that opinion? Is that simply your guess or do you actually have some data to support your opinion?
You also said:
"3 - "I have consistently advocated outsourcing police services to the Sheriff but so far I am the only Atherton resident who has publicly advocated such a move to the Town Council - hardly an overwhelming mandate.""
Could that be because the citizens of your fair town have seen what happens to people who "cross" the APD?
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 3:01 pm
Quit patting yourselves on the back. I will not apologize for the truths I have written. Mr. Danielson will have to answer to athorities when the time comes. It's like stoning the messenger. I have written nothing libelous, I can proved everything I have written. I can take you step by step of every step Danielson has taken over the years. Can you say the same? If not, shut up and figure it out yourselves. I love freedom of speak, I don't like it when it is abused but you are barking up the wrong tree if you think I am the one abusing it. Please look at Danielson, he is the person you need to figure out. Why would you stick up for someone like him who will do Atherton and it's employees wrong.
Again, you need to do your homework, like I did. It's worth the investment. Get on line and start reading all the Council Minutes starting in Elk Grove and then Wildomar. Then you can appologize to me.
Libelous and anonymous is so easy to say when you are running from the truth. Why would you be so angry? I am written this to protect the citizens of the town and the true victims in this, the 13 employees who are slated to be laid off. What are your motives?
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 3:18 pm
You are wrong. Stop trying to rewrite the facts.
Finding B-1: The City Manager knew of the potential conflict of interest problems caused by Mr. Cooper’s and Mr. Leary’s refusal to accept and follow legal advice relative to limits on their actions required by the conflict of interest laws. The City Manager was remiss in failing to establish clearly elaborated and consistent procedures to deal with Council actions that might result in possible conflict of interest violations.
Remiss in your responsibilities is remiss in your responsibilities. It shows there is a character deficiency in Danielson.
Posted by Muffy S, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Thomas (Sharon Heights: It doesn't matter where the money came from to do the management analysis report, but it does matter who did it. If you have been following posts then Kashiwagi will ring a bell. Kashiwagi does the report and then Duncan Jones retires and Kashiwagi sits in his seat. Conflict on interest wouldn't you say?
As far as the Grand Jury Report being old news, I am sure a lot of people are hearing about it for the first time. Don't ever assume people are always aware.
Posted by POGO, a resident of the Woodside: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 3:43 pm
The most revealing part of Muffy's libelous comments is "...and the true victims in this, the 13 employees who are slated to be laid off." I'd bet dollars to donuts she's either one of them or related to one of those 13. It's unfortunate, because the Atherton town staff is largely comprised of very good, dedicated workers.
There is nothing "factual" about her post. It's shameful that she would resort to this type of irresponsible accusation and thuggery.
Posted by Thomas (Sharon Heights), a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 3:59 pm Thomas (Sharon Heights) is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
Menlo Voter...Mr. Danielson may actually have proposed outsourcing of the APD to the town council in closed session so it's unfair to keep holding Mr. Carpenter's feet to the fire since he would not have any knowledge on the matter. Notwithstanding my opinion that such a decision would first have to be put to the voters, I would, however, not expect Mr. Danielson to ever make such a recommendation since he was the driving force behind voiding the sheriff's contract in Elk Grove and responsible for the formation of the new Elk Grove Police Department back in 2006. It would appear that Mr. Danielson is not the darling of the California sheriff's union.
Sorry to burst your bubble P.C. but you can always get behind Mr. Johns newest criminal complaint against the city manager replete with your favorite Brown Act violations in case you have a change of heart. Hopefully you'll be sending another letter of concern about this latest violation to the district attorney for criminal prosecution.
And Mr. Stogner, I'm still searching for your new facebook page...
"San Mateo County Ralph M Brown Act". Perhaps you decided to amend it after my post about no district attorney in California ever having prosecuted it since I did find a group called just "Ralph M. Brown Act" (four members) with no editorial pro or con...just a page lifted from Wikipedia.
POGO...As you wipe that smile off your face, ease up on the Muffy torture. A lot more enjoyable fishing on a lake than shooting them in a barrel.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 5:01 pm
Peter: "And I am not your personal answering service - do your own homework if you want to know why someone other than me does or does not do what you think they should."
Never said you were. What I have been doing and you are being to obtuse to address is your "hero worship" of Danielsen. Tthere are plenty of difficult thigs he could be doing that would be more effective than what he has done to save the town money. As long as you continue to call him a "champion" you can keep expecting questions as to why you think he is one especially given his lack of action in thee other areas.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 5:07 pm
if Danielsen presented outsourcing the APD in closed session then, Mr. Johns is correct and he has violated the Brown Act as the closed session was not properly noticed. Funny Peter wouldn't be jumping all over that it it happened.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 5:09 pm
I'm sorry but you're clueless. there was no "indictment" as you said. As POGO said it is libelous to say so. Civil Grand Juries don't hand down "indictments", Criminal Grand Juries do. The report you keep refering to was from a Civil Grand Jury. Unless you have some other evidence you should retract your statement, because it is flat wrong.
Posted by Joe Friday, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 5:58 pm
To all of you unemployed attorney's out there:
This is a blog. It isn't a courtroom. Murderers who go free on a technicality only to go out and murder again are a problem. If Danielson wasn't technically "indicted" and THAT is the only point you have proven, you aren't worth all that much to this conversation.
It is undeniable that he has established a track record of questionable professional behavior, contrary to the best interests of the people he serves, to financially benefit himself and his band of "cronies".
He did enough to be recognized by the Grand Jury of Sacramento County for the ethics violations he overlooked and what he did not do to stop them from occurring. He was not the subject of the investigation, and that, in my opinion is why it was only "civil".
Posted by Thelma, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 6:15 pm
so back to the guys in the blue hoods for a second then..
does any one know any thing about the Consultant Company PMC who has been making a study of the APD for 25,000$ that started 5 months ago?
Does anybody know who or if anyone who has seen the report?
I can think of examples of expensive reports that past city managers have refused to provide to even the council members (report/Lance Bayer, best friend of city attorney/Mark Hynes/locked away from entire council by city manager/Jim Robinson).
So the question is worth asking--What is known about PMC Consulting and it's independence
and who will actually read the results of this study of the APD
Posted by Thomas (Sharon Heights), a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 6:19 pm Thomas (Sharon Heights) is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
Joe...the Grand Jury was investigating the two council members that were intimidating the rest of the town council. Their purpose was not to investigate Mr. Danielson. While a blog is not a court room, it's also not an excuse to be loose with the facts. You wouldn't by any chance be related to the same Joe Friday behind Mr. Buckheit's falsified police report? Say it ain't so, Joe.
Posted by Joe Friday, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 6:44 pm
No Thomas, not even relatively relative. Just so we don't start (or continue) playing "antics with semantics" I stated Danielson was NOT the subject of the investigation...but since you brought it up, he DID get slammed for not doing his job. Please try to stay focussed here would ya...
Thelma, on the other hand, introduces things that are suspicious enough in very nature to warrant some serious looking into (deeper investigation). Kudos to Thelma for "keeping it real" as the kids say.
We are paying for all of this activity. Nobody who serves us has any right keeping it from us, or not explaining (in detail) how it was paid for.
Posted by Thomas (Sharon Heights), a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 7:20 pm Thomas (Sharon Heights) is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
PMC out of Rancho Cordove provides a wide range of services including strategic planning, engineering, building & safety and environmental services to public agencies since 1995. Their services were also used by the town in 2007 long before Mr. Danielson arrived on the scene if you reference The Almanac article from February 27th, 2007:
"Atherton Seeks Help on Historic Artifacts Rules"
So you also stay focused, there was nothing stated in the Grand Jury report that recognized Mr. Danielson was guilty of any ethics violations or else he would have been subject to immediate dismissal.
Posted by Joe Friday, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 8:55 pm
Peter Carpenter sure has some (emphasis added) hang up with these "white hoods". He speaks of them (ad nauseum) as if from personal experience, but that couldn't be the case, could it Peter?
I prefer a much less boring approach to this blogging thing...it's called staying on subject and not getting your panties in a bunch over mind numbing minutia. I have been to town council meetings, nothing is decided via customary means; debate among members of the council in the presence of the public. Everything has been pre-decided during closed sessions and then regurgitated for the record from on high.
Ask a question and try to get a straight answer...then and only then Peter, will you be all that POGO believes you to be.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 9:20 pm
please spare us the histrionics of "white hoods." Your inuendo to the KKK is quite clear and uncalled for. People are asking for answers. They are asking here because they aren't getting answers from their elected representatives. Or they fear their own police department so much that they don't want to expose themselves to what others have had to deal with from the APD when they weren't "happy" with someone.
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 9:28 pm
Joe Friday asks:"as if from personal experience, but that couldn't be the case, could it Peter?"
I lived in the deep south when 'respectable citizens' wore white hoods at night and then deplored those actions the next day. Yes, I have personal experience of seeing this hypocrisy and I see it again in the postings of these anonymous individuals.
Posted by Thomas (Sharon Heights), a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 10:00 pm Thomas (Sharon Heights) is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
Joe F...I enjoy this forum when I have free time to follow it and I tend to agree with you about Mr. Carpenter. There is a certain rigidity to his comments that he is never wrong despite anyone presenting independent evidence to the contrary.
I do, however, disagree with your opinion about POGO. I have come to enjoy his posts, especially on national issues such as healthcare in which he provides an exceptional commentary which I find insightful as well as very informative. While I sometimes find his posts to be a bit too non-confrontational, he's no shrinking violet when it comes to recognizing fact from fiction as well as apologizing when he feels he has not been right. That takes someone with a lot more intelligence and a lot less ego than Mr. Carpenter and it would be a mistake to confuse good manners for a leaping lemming.
Posted by POGO, a resident of the Woodside: other neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2011 at 10:09 pm
Thomas appears to be the only other person who took the time to read the grand jury report about Elk Grove. The posts from Muffy and Joe Friday are totally uniformed. I will leave it to others to weigh their unsubstantiated charges with the facts.
Thomas is correct. The focus of the grand jury was the two conflicted council members, not Mr. Danielson. The reason for the grand jury investigation was because Elk Grove's officials - and that included other council members, the city attorney and the city manager - were powerless to resolve the situation where two conflicted council members refused to recuse themselves. Because no one - not the city attorney or the city manager - can "make" an elected official recuse themself, the grand jury was asked to look into this matter and make recommendations to prevent this from happening in the future.
Quoting from the key finding of the grand jury report: "In summary, Mr. Cooper and Mr. Leary (the two conflicted council members) exhibited a pattern of knowingly and willfully disregarding their responsibility to abide by the conflict of interest provisions of state law. The evidence and sworn testimony received by the Grand Jury does not support any claim that their failure to follow the law resulted from either erroneous legal advice or an incomplete understanding of the law." That legal advice and understanding of the conflict that the report referenced came from the Elk Grove City Attorney and City Manager (Mr. Danielson). And here's the link: Web Link
The report states that Mr. Danielson was NOT AT FAULT for the failure of the two stupid council members for "refusing to recuse themselves" (that quote is also from the grand jury report). The report did, however, RECOMMEND that to help prevent this in the future, Mr. Danielson could isolate the Sheriff's Department discussion on agendas. That way, there would be no doubt that the subject matter was separate. The grand jury report noted that this wouldn't have assured the recusal of the two council members, but it would have removed one of their excuses.
So, when posters state so "factually" that the grand jury report was "authored by a judge" (it wasn't) or that Mr. Danielson was "indicted," it could not be a bigger LIE. Unlike Joe Friday, I don't view LIES as "mind numbing minutia." These are not just "technicalities" that are unrelated. They are the basis for the complaints against Mr. Danielson. For that reason, they are dishonest, false, misleading and libelous... and truly disgusting.
For the record, my audience is not Joe Friday or Muffy, who are welcome to wallow in each other's dishonesty, it is other readers who might be influenced by their LIES.
If you knew anything about the operation of a civil grand jury (and, in case you forgot, it is noted on the opening page of that same grand jury report had you taken the time to read it), they refer any suspected criminality to the District Attorney for prosecution. In this case, they did not refer anything to the District Attorney.
Joe Friday's statement that "I have been to town council meetings (and)nothing is decided via customary means" would be a clear violation of law. I would think that someone who calls himself Joe Friday, if he truly had knowledge of this crime (other than his mindless speculation), he would report this to authorities. Unlike Mr. Friday, I have personal knowledge of the operation of a city council and I can tell you that this statement is totally false.
Posted by Thelma, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 12, 2011 at 1:43 am
Thomas: you are right I remember now--But just because PMC had done consulting work for Atherton on the expensive but failed Historic Artifact Ordinance, prior to Danialson's tenure dose not relieve me of all doubt about what they might offer the Town now on the current APD review if it ever sees the light of day.
After all the time and money spent on that effort, Atherton remains one of only two cities in the entire county with no historic protections. There was even some pricy litigation over the Lamb's now nomadic urn removal as the result.
Do you know anything more about them to indicate an ability to assess police department efficiencies?
I am expecting the usual story "Sorry folks--even though you all paid for this report that has enormous potential to impact your town, we are unable to release the results of a study of employee position requirements because it is a personnel issue that is too private to reveal. Get ready for some version of this.
I really do feel like all we do is to pay endless strangers to figure things out for us, so it difficult not to feel apprehensive. Plus with all the private donations to the APD, it is difficult not wonder who these people think that they are, or actually are, working for.
Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of the Atherton: Lindenwood neighborhood, on Jun 12, 2011 at 7:42 am
Thelma - all of the reports that you mention are public documents and available by request. Only individual personnel files and certain police activity reports are permitted to be kept from the public.
Proposition 59, amended the California Constitution to include a public right of access to government information:
“The people have the right of access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business, and, therefore, the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies shall be open to public scrutiny.”
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 12, 2011 at 5:21 pm
I'm not isolated from either Peter or POGO. I have a great deal of respect for both of them. I know POGO personally and would like to get to know Peter some day as well. I find both to be intelligent and well informed. I don't always agree with them on certain issues but I can't think of anyone I always agree with. That's the beauty of this forum; people are free to disagree. I don't take it personally unless someone casts aspersions.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on Jun 12, 2011 at 7:19 pm
Don't hold your breath Marlin. Even if Mr. Johns makes good on his threat to place Dobbie and Danielsen under citizens arrest he has to hand his "arrestees" over to law enforcement. Law enforcement is required to "accept" the arrest. At that point the officer can release the arrestee and file a report, leaving prosecution up io the DA. I think we all know where that will go.
Posted by Thomas (Sharon Heights), a resident of the Menlo Park: Sharon Heights neighborhood, on Jun 13, 2011 at 9:46 pm Thomas (Sharon Heights) is a member (registered user) of Almanac Online
Thelma..."You just made my head explode" after just reading your last post. I should have known you would be too clever in thinking I could pull off such a ruse. No doubt my punishment for breaking up your hen party with Muffy by introducing all those pesky facts to the conversation. As you said earlier on this forum, "Cats are cats, not dogs. We don't let dogs fly around either---that's for birds mostly. (7/27/10)
Posted by Thelma, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2011 at 12:15 am
Are you referring to Alan Carlson's famous phase 3 audit Council Session discussion with Marsala and Janz about "is it really a duck-just because it walks the talk and sort of looks like one?"--cuz otherwise you are still thinking of someone else's memorable lines.