Quote of the Day

“We can’t let things out.” — Eureka City Councilman Mike Newman defending the secrecy behind the city’s firing of police chief Garr Nielsen.

Mike Newman

In a nutshell, that’s the culture of Eureka city government: None of your beeswax.

But while Newman says the city council is keeping secret “things” it can’t “let out,” he opens the other side of his mustache and says ”Nielsen is the only person that can shed light on it.”

But Nielsen already “shed light” on the only reason given for the firing. City Manager Dave Tyson told him he was fired for “differing management styles.” If he was fired for a separate reason, Tyson didn’t tell him what it was.

Ducking responsibility to be open about a management decision while at the same time blaming a lack of transparency on someone else looks ridiculous. Voters are angry and worse — they are laughing at the clown show.

  1. The Big Picture
    July 10, 2011 at 12:40 am

    Newman’s in good company.

    Jager voted to end the investigation of fellow council member Jim Worthen who was accused of costing the city $1 million in housing funds after Worthen allegedly tried to have the application rewritten to include a political donor’s project! (TS 4-9-93).

    None of your business!

    Nothing to see here, it’s over, get on with your life!

    If we had a real reporter to connect the dots, a newspaper willing to reprint it, and the angry voters that result, this long, long legacy would have ended by now. Instead, we have the new round of good ol’ boy’s preparing for their political Right of Passage.

  2. pattycakes
    July 10, 2011 at 1:08 am

    As mentioned on another thread, the council truly is circling the wagons. They might think things aren’t going to get out, but I imagine that anyone with a computer knows a lot by now.
    In fact, I can’t imagine a day doesn’t go by that someone isn’t looking at Frank and thinking about him and his hooker friends. Or David and thinking about him getting coffee thrown at him by a cuckolded husband. Or Pam covering for David day after day, then herself running over to see the fire chief…. the list goes on.
    Yep, these are the folks in power all right, and they are counting on this all going away in a week or so.
    Be fun if the stink hung on awhile though, like skunk smell tends to do.

  3. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 2:01 am

    So Nielsen is the only person who can shed light on this? That’s pretty rich considering he is on the record saying it came out of the blue and he was shocked.
    And scuse me if I tend to believe him over the Newman, Jager, Tyson etc gang. Nielsen was a target from the minute he started making the changes the council charged him with. A few of his own employees created the blog to smear him and drive him away. They even had him followed trying to catch him doing something wrong! Sounds like a made-for-tv-movie! But the community has spoken out many times that they are pleased with the changes. So what gives? The problem is that Tyson & Co never expected the repercussions they got. Adulterous relationships got exposed, jealousy reared it’s ugly head, overtime money and the dispatch crown got taken away! And some employees were actually made to work for their paychecks–Omigod!

    This city has a slimy underbelly that was exposed when things got shaken up. Just the fact that the blog was created by someone living and working in this city proves that. So do the Hansen lawsuit depositions. If those things don’t give you pause about what kinds of people are running this city, then the secrecy shrouding the chief’s firing should. But I wouldn’t expect any more comment from Nielsen. He is probably laughing all the way to the bank and glad to be out of a low class, backwoods swamp.

  4. July 10, 2011 at 6:02 am

    “The Clown Council” could not be a more apt name. Now maybe they’d all cran into a tiny car and drive away.

    Firing someone for “no cause” means it’s a MANAGEMENT DECISION, not a PEWRSONNEL DECISION, and not subject to the same rules. Tyson wants it both ways. For ANYONE to be treated the way Tyson treated Nielsen for anything short of major malfeasance (which would be “for cause”) should be grounds for dismissing Tyson.

    Sorry, Dave. It’s time to go!

  5. Ed
    July 10, 2011 at 8:37 am

    Why doesn’t the council just say “you can’t handle the truth” and see how that flies?

  6. Barb Leonard
    July 10, 2011 at 8:38 am

    Pretty sophomoric “aptness” don’t you think? Dave is not going so give it a rest, and, BTW, spinning misinformation to the public is why you folks keep losing. In what world is any employer allowed to disclose personnel information??? I am sure they would love to publicly unload the very thick file on Garr and I am sure Garr is loving it that they can’t.

    If Garr was so blindsided by his firing, why was he out looking for jobs after Larry was kicked to the curb? Enquiring minds want to know.

  7. July 10, 2011 at 8:53 am

    Tyson DID unload a thick file on the Grand Jury, which found Tyson’s accusations against Garr to be without merit.

  8. Goldie
    July 10, 2011 at 8:54 am

    So easily this turns into political taunting. The sadness is in the neighborhoods that were so well served by the police under Garr’s leadership. Why was an efficient police chief removed? We don’t know. The council is not talking. Jager is smug about it. People are not happy with the decision and frustrated with the lack of information behind it. $160,000 is added to Tyson’s list of misspent funds This will not be forgotten.

  9. Ed
    July 10, 2011 at 8:56 am

    There’s nothing unusual about looking for work if there’s no guarantee of contract extension. It’s called planning ahead and covering your bases. And when has this council ever considered Garr’s privacy? If they had such a thick file on him, they would have used it for political leverage. You and Rose are grasping at straws.

  10. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 9:13 am

    There are interesting skeletons in Newman’s closet that I’m sure would make a large portion of his supporters uncomfortable.

  11. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 9:18 am

    There has never been a more divisive council in Eureka.

    I know people that have severed friendships with current council members because of their arrogance.

    And when the monied interests that paid their way into power are done with them they’ll be very lonely at the very least.

    Do the right thing, Mike and Marian. Step down and go away.

  12. Matthew Bass
    July 10, 2011 at 9:30 am

    Hey all knowing, all wise, Barb Leonard; share with us why your little boy all ways had it in for Garr while he was Chief. Whats the back story on that?

  13. Down the Road
    July 10, 2011 at 9:31 am

    Eureka City Code (’63 Code 2-5.119) Removal or suspension
    of officers appointed by the council or city manager.

    Any officer of the city appointed by the council, or appointed by the
    city manager subject to the approval of the council, who shall be
    removed or suspended by the council or the city manager shall
    have a written notice of the cause of his or her removal or suspension from duty, and he or she shall have the opportunity
    to be heard on the cause of the suspension or removal before
    a public hearing of the council.

    At will contract with term limits is illegal. Read Ca. Code Sections
    2922 & 2924.

    Anything else said by Mike Newman or any of the gang of 4 and
    the village idiot Tyson is bull shit.

  14. Jack
    July 10, 2011 at 9:37 am

    Hi Barb,

    I believe Garr answered your questions about why Chief Nielsen was interviewing in the KLSG interview with John Matthews.

    Here’s a link:

    https://humboldtherald.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/garr-nielsen-on-kslg/

  15. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 9:53 am

    Looks like the spin continues! With the exception of Barb.

    This council is doing just great, with the exception of Atkins. I wonder if her “lawyer” has explained her rights to her …….. whatever that is supposed to mean. Who is her lawyer?

    Nielsen didn’t shed any light on anyting. He knew his days waere numbered. The BS about this “coming out of the blue” and hitting him like a ton of brinks was BS, but what else would you expect from him.

    And Heraldo how do you know what Tyson gave to the Grand Jury? If you are so tight with Nielsen, and I believe that you are, why don’t you get him to sign a notorized waiver allowing the city council, the mayor, and city manager to publically discuss issue in his personnel file. Or just issued relating to his termination?

  16. July 10, 2011 at 9:56 am

    So the firing was because of Nielsen’s “personal life?” What does that have to do with differing management styles? You appear to be calling Tyson a liar.

  17. 69er
    July 10, 2011 at 9:57 am

    I Wonder?

    I wonder which of you would be the first to jump on the one who would break the law by revealing what took place in the closed door session, remember the “BrownAct”.

    I wonder why Linda Atkins does not reveal what she knows about that meeting, wasn’t she there, wasn’t she paying attention to the conversation?

  18. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 10:04 am

    More Eurekans are waking up.

    I bet Mike and Marian are asking themselves why they agreed to be useful idiots.

  19. July 10, 2011 at 10:09 am

    Because what was discussed at the Tuesday meeting may not have had anything to do with the firing,which is why Tyson set up the infamous Friday meeting with virtually no notice to discuss the matter.

  20. 69er
    July 10, 2011 at 10:15 am

    mresquan says:

    July 10, 2011 at 10:09 am

    “Because what was discussed at the Tuesday meeting may not have had anything to do with the firing,which is why Tyson set up the infamous Friday meeting with virtually no notice to discuss the matter.”

    I take this to be pure speculation on your part or are you in on the “know”???

  21. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 10:40 am

    According to First Amendment attorney Duffy Carolan, the Brown Act doesn’t prohibit city officials from releasing all of the information surrounding an employee termination, just the information that was obtained in closed session.

    ”They can’t disclose confidential information that required being present in a closed session meeting, but if they have information that they have known all along, they can talk about it if they want to,” Carolan said. “If they have known for a long time that there were problems or complaints, they could discuss that.” …

    …Peter Scheer, a lawyer and executive director of the First Amendment Coalition, said… that while there may be some personnel information that the city cannot discuss, “it should be possible for the city to honor any legal obligation to protect the chief’s privacy while still conveying to the public its essential reasons for dismissing the police chief.” …

    http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_18446203

  22. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 10:41 am

    Sorry, those three paragraphs should have been in italics — they are quotes from the Times-Standard atricle linked to below them.

  23. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 11:26 am

    Honestly, This situation does have the makings of a good new movie a la Serpico.

  24. High Finance
    July 10, 2011 at 11:50 am

    The children, armchair lawyers and the slimeball cupcakes spreading unfounded & libelous rumors can rant and foam at the mouth all you want.

    Personnel issues are closed. Period. Newman is right, only Garr Nielsen can disclose what was said. With lawyers lurking around any corner looking for an excuse to sue somebody over something no other course of action is open to the council members.

    Even your hero, Linda Atkins, says the same damn thing. So get over it children and grow up. This is just Heraldo using any excuse to lather up his followers. He is playing you all for fools.

  25. 69er
    July 10, 2011 at 11:59 am

    Well said Hi Fi.

  26. July 10, 2011 at 12:05 pm

    Newman doesn’t need any help looking like a fool. He manages to do it all by himself.

  27. 69er
    July 10, 2011 at 12:08 pm

    Heraldo doesn’t need any help looking like a fool. He manages to do it all by himself.

  28. July 10, 2011 at 12:29 pm

    Clever.

  29. The Big Picture
    July 10, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    And the resident troll issues another proclamation…what a bore.

    Only a lathered-up Reich-Winger is capable of excusing the hundreds of thousands of dollars an incompetent city manager has recently cost this city with his arbitrary and capricious actions.

    Garr has already disclosed what he knows, his service was exemplary and effective. This community and its media should be outraged, demanding a full investigation.

    At-will employment is inappropriate in government. It invites corruption by allowing top bureaucrats to eliminate perceived opponents with the force of public funds, attorneys and insurance.

    The effect is to produce enough fear at work that incompetent managers can exploit to motivate staff and stifle dissent… thus, circumventing the hard work that professionalism, and due-process requires. The human weakness to eventually utilize that fear for personal gain, power, and vendettas, is irresistible and widespread.

    In the private sector the owner usually pays the price of corruption.

    In public employment It’s unnecessary, costly, and not part of professional management practices using transparent, routine evaluations to build a legitimate case against an individual.

    Or, we can sit back and wait for the next self-serving action by an incompetent manager to cost us dearly.

    Honestly, they couldn’t get along for the remaining 18 months of his contract??

  30. Barb Leonard
    July 10, 2011 at 12:34 pm

    Mathew Bass…..Jeff never had it in for Garr, in fact, he was sad to see him go but understood why it happened. Typically Jeff, he did not tell me why he wasn’t surprised, but I do know Tyson wasn’t the one calling the shots.

    BTW, instead of spreading more misinformation, why not tell us something truthful: i.e. you haven’t the faintest idea how Jeff feels about anything and there is NOT a world where personnel information is publicly divulged, therefore, it has to stay behind closed doors.

  31. anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 12:52 pm

    I do know how Jeff feels about taking land on Humboldt Bay from the citizens of Eureka and turning it over to developers whose only concern is the bottom line for them. He did us no service there and I haven’t trusted him since to do the right thing for the people. Can’t say I did before that but his actions regarding the balloon tract put his real priorities out there.

  32. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 12:55 pm

    there is NOT a world where personnel information is publicly divulged

    Some “personnel information” is indeed confidential, but in most cases, when someone is fired, some kind of explanation is given.

    In this case, “management differences” was offered as a reason, but no further detail was provided. It seems to me that some additional information could and should be provided about what kind of issues Tyson and the Gang of Four had with Nielsen’s management style. That would not have to divulge the kind of specifics that were discussed in closed session, but could at least give the public some idea what “management differences” was supposed to mean, and perhaps some idea of what kind of management style they will be looking for in a new Chief.

    On the other hand, if the “management differences” line was just baloney, and the real reason was a political and/or personal vendetta, then their unwillingness to elaborate on the “management differences” makes perfect sense.

  33. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    Of course the bottom line, once again, is that Tyson and the Gang of Four obviously didn’t have a strong and defensible reason for firing Nielsen, which is why they fired him ” without cause” and retreated behind the excuse of “can’t talk about personnel issues.”

    If they had some real, compelling reason why he had to be fired NOW, they would have fired him “for cause,” and would have been quite safe in telling the public what that “cause” was. And if there truly was a defensible, compelling “cause” for the firing, Eureka taxpayers wouldn’t have been forced to shell out something like $160,000 for severance pay and CalPERS.

    Given that their reason or reasons obviously just weren’t all that compelling, they should have at least just allowed his contract to run out and replaced him at that time, saving Eueka taxpayers some $160,000 in the process, while still being able to name his replacement.

    So, in other words, Eureka taxpayers are being forced to shell out $160,000 so that Tyson and the Gang of Four could enjoy the luxury of immediate gratification.

  34. High Finance
    July 10, 2011 at 1:33 pm

    Were you aware that Garr Nielsen himself fired employees over the years using the same “Without Cause” line in order to protect the city from any lawsuits Tra ?

    Big Picture, quit “humping my leg” as PJ says.

  35. July 10, 2011 at 1:48 pm

    Barb Leonard is much too kind to the sludgy troll who posts as Matthew Bass, but I wonder why the defenders-of-Mr. Tyson/haters-of-Larry-Glass cannot even fathom why the public may feel wounded by a newly-elected City Council whose first move was to reverse the Jefferson School purchase (without so much as a phone call to the committee that had worked for years on the proposal), and whose second notable move was to fire a police chief who was widely perceived as having greatly improved the department’s service to the community.

  36. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 1:54 pm

    HiFi, blowing smoke out his ass again. The chief can’t fire anyone unless it’s with cause or they are on probation. Plus, Tyson had the leash so tight, he couldn’t let anyone go without Tyson’s ok anyway.

  37. High Finance
    July 10, 2011 at 2:01 pm

    When someone is on probation, they are able to be fired Without Cause. The former chief, like all chiefs, has to do it sometimes.

    Once again, your hero Linda Atkins is also remaining silent because she knows it is the law.

  38. insider
    July 10, 2011 at 2:10 pm

    HiFi is full himself again.Tyson wouldn’t let Chief Nielsen or any other dept. head fire anyone without his say so. Two personnel directors and a City Attorney left becuase of the “dictatorial” methods of the City Manager.
    How long would Suzy O, Dee Dee Wilson or any other of the insurrectionist have lasted if the Ex-Chief had the ability to hire and fire. The City of Eureka is a monarchy run by King David.
    Down with the KING!

  39. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 2:11 pm

    “why the public may feel wounded by a newly-elected City Council whose first move was to reverse the Jefferson School purchase (without so much as a phone call to the committee that had worked for years”

    Jeebus, Joel – here how it works – Mike Newman asked during open session of the first meeting he was a council member to put it on the agenda for a later meeting. Once it was agendized, it was properly noticed and the decision (which I do not agree with, btw) to pull out of the purchase was made.

    In other words, the decision was not made until a later meeting. You might not like the decision – I don’t, but you are simply wrong in implying there was no kind of notice. I agree with Heidi – it was a punch in the stomach to have Newman to want the decision revisited, but the Jefferson neighborhood supporters had ample time to be prepared for the meeting where support was pulled.

    If I recall correctly (and I’m pretty sure I am right on this), one of Larry Glass’s first actions as a council member was to get the Waterfront Drive extension project put back on the agenda for a later meeting, at which time THAT project was scrapped.

    TRA,

    “Of course the bottom line, once again, is that Tyson and the Gang of Four obviously didn’t have a strong and defensible reason for firing Nielsen, which is why they fired him ” without cause” and retreated behind the excuse of “can’t talk about personnel issues.” ”

    No, the bottom line is that if you let someone go “for cause” then it can be far more costly to litigate, whether there is a ton of evidence, or not. You simply are NOT reasonable. Given the choice of continued litigation or NO litigation, NO litigation wins every time.

    I agree, it sucks – people want to know the reasons, but ask yourself this – when is the last time you have seen, or read about someone let go for cause?

    99% of the time, the without cause route is taken, simply because it is the least expensive way to go.

  40. July 10, 2011 at 2:18 pm

    …Clown show is RIGHT!

  41. The Big Picture
    July 10, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    And, of course, that’s total bull 2:11.

    Pull back the curtains on costly terminations for cause and you’ll find an incompetent manager who failed to understand or follow routine procedures or the law!

    The least expensive way is to hire city managers who are educated in their field, not well-connected born-here’s who demonstrate more concern about vendettas, favors, and power, than public resources.

    Rest assured, every Reich-Bagger in Eureka would be frothing if some damn liberal cost the city half as much as the clones at city hall.

    Hiring professionals that are trained in Initiating routine evaluations that document performance and provide due-process with transparency cost more up-front, but offer huge savings down-the-road.

    It’s a common truth in many different fields.

  42. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    Once again we have Hi Fi, for at least the zillionth time, lecturing everyone and calling those who choose to think differerently demeaning names, in this case “children”.

    There is no one this blog and i mean no one, who so consistently makes childish comments than Hi Fi,

    Pot, Kettle. Black.

  43. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    No, the bottom line is that if you let someone go “for cause” then it can be far more costly to litigate, whether there is a ton of evidence, or not.

    If there is a “tons of evidence” then nobody in their right mind is going to try to litigate it. If there is so much evidence that there is no reasonable basis for the lawsuit, making it a “frivolous” lawsuit, I believe that the plaintiff could even be ordered to pay the city’s legal fees.

    The bottom line remains the same: the “reasons” behind the firing were too weak to go the “with cause” route. Lacking strong reasons they should have just waited for his contract to expire.

    Instead, they went for immediate gratification, at a cost of about $160,000. Of course that’s taxpayers’ money, not their own money, so I guess to the impatient councilmembers, anxious to have their way, it’s no big deal to waste “other peoples’ money” on a whim.

  44. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    King David. That fits.

  45. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 4:51 pm

    It’s specultion. markie doesn’t know Jack, he just thinks he does.

    This issue is going away dispite all the efforts to keep it going. It’s only an issue to a few anyway. The voters selected to council, to get Glass and his ilk out. If the majority of the voters are unhappy with the councils decisions they can vote accordingly at the next election. Get over it.

    Nielsen is gone, for good reasons I’m sure, and that is that. Time to get on with more serious issues, like is the bear at the zoo getting enough fiber in his diet.

  46. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 4:53 pm

    Hi Fi is just about the only person posting that gets it.

    tra thinks he/she is some sort of intelectual but is actually either an idiot, grossly misinformed, or lacks the ability to think logically.

  47. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 5:04 pm

    Gee, 4:53, what a very persuasive argument you make.

  48. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 5:08 pm

    Nielsen is gone, for good reasons I’m sure

    Many are not so sure that there were “good reasons.” Clearly the reasons were not “good” enough to fire him “with cause.”

  49. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 7:01 pm

    Instead of just making Suzy O. do her work properly Neilsen should have fired her for incompetence. Garr was way to good a guy. He has never met anyone like Suzy O. before I’m sure. Vindictive, vengeful and a liar.

  50. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 7:05 pm

    Yeah and what’s with Suzy telling everyone Garr lied in depositions? For one thing that’s insubordination, for another it’s contempt of court and for a 3rd, if she was so sure of winning, why would she need to spread anything around?

  51. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 7:54 pm

    Insubordination or just the truth?

    And tra you still don’t understand the concept of firing with or without cause. You made my point for me.

    4:53

  52. tra
    July 10, 2011 at 8:38 pm

    What I understand is that Nielsen could have been fired “for cause” if he had violated his contract in some way, or if he was guilty of gross mismangement. Apparently neither of those things happened, but Tyson and the Gang of Four still wanted to fire him for whatever weak-ass “management differences” reasons or — more likely — personal/political motivations, so they had to go the “without cause” route, costing city taxpayers $160,000.

  53. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 9:04 pm

    Lets face it, it is because of a few vengeful individuals. It has nothing to do with the job Neilsen was doing.

  54. Anonymous
    July 10, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    Once again tra is talking/typing out his backside. And tra still doesn’t understand the concept of firing without cause or firing with cause.

    Tyson and the “gang of four”, by that you mean the majority of the lawfully elected city council (80%)?

    tra you really have no idea what you are posting about, none! You don’t understand the concept of severance pay either. Maybe you should educate yourself before posting again, that is if you care about any shred of accuracy in you posts?

    And 9:04pm how few “vengeful individuals” are you referring to?? 3, 17, 8 ?? And you’re saying, or suggesting, these few individuals convice 80% of the city council, the city manager, and the mayor to let Neilsen go for no good reason?!

    Nielsen is gone, I underdtand his house is sold and a moving truck has been to his house and gone. Neilsen has accepted it and so should youall.

  55. pattycakes
    July 10, 2011 at 9:51 pm

    “Differing management styles” is Tyson-speak for “he wouldn’t kiss my ass and was a better man than me and now I can’t even take my afternoon snacks in my office anymore, wah wah.”

    Jeez, Dave, you had 4 years to fix the problem. Guess you aren’t as smart as ya thought if “without cause” and paying him off was the best you could do.

  56. anon
    July 10, 2011 at 9:55 pm

    9:46 is that you, Rex Bohn? You got nuthin better to do than watch the goins on at your next door neighbor former chief’s house that you havent even talked to for the last year because he wounded your bff David?

    Oh wait you didnt have to watch. You were calling the realtor to find out if the persons moving in were “right” for ya.

  57. insider
    July 10, 2011 at 10:23 pm

    Rex is spreading all kinds of BS around, anything for his BFF Tyson!

  58. Anonymous
    July 11, 2011 at 7:19 am

    Don’t blame Bohn for what I think.

  59. Down the Road
    July 11, 2011 at 8:56 am

    The following instructions are very easy: Put At Will firing in your
    computer. See the big print. You cannot fire a person at will
    if there is a term limit in their contract that is over one month.
    Garr Nielsen’s was 5 years. What is so god dam hard about
    understanding that? The city manager by law has to give him
    written notice as to why he is being fired.

    No this isn’t going to go away. This has nothing to do about
    Garr Nielsen now. It is about the Brown Act. It is about this
    backward group of people called the old guard, good old boys
    or the boss hogs. This is also about a group of people that
    for years have called the shots anyway they wanted regardless
    of the statutes. This is about people who fawn over themselves,
    while this city rots.

  60. mayfly
    July 11, 2011 at 11:00 am

    Could we all please vet our candidates before they’re elected? Is Rex Bohn a serious candidate?

  61. tra
    July 11, 2011 at 11:42 am

    9:46,

    Simply repeating that I’m wrong and that I don’t understand doesn’t make it so, and it certainly doesn’t persuade me or anyone else of anything.

    If you have some actual information to share, feel free to share it.

  62. Victims All
    July 11, 2011 at 11:42 am

    Wow, DTR nails it again. But there’s so much more.

    When you’re opponents are squealing in unison to “move on”, you know there’s a fire behind that smoke.

    There was a picture of Tyson on Heraldo that must have been removed/replaced but it clearly showed his telltale tiny red veins indicative of that evening martini, just as Mathew Owen’s permanent red-hue reveals of him (Heraldo 6/28).

    Fortunately for them, their Martini-In-Chief happens to be a bigzillionaire capable of chumming the electorate with thorough propaganda.

    This dirty-little-secret is now a pandemic in America. Our home-grown variety share the same “can do no wrong” psychosis common to others addicted to a narcotic.

    They blame, then deny, then repeat the cycle.

    The public is handed the bill.

  63. Down the Road
    July 11, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    Tra: I have Garr Nielsen’s employment contract. I have the
    city codes. I have California Labor Laws. I have state law
    regarding At Will employment contracts. Just what is it that
    you don’t understand?

    For the record I was a witness on the Grand Jury proceeding regarding Garr Nielsen. I walked in there with eight years
    of police reports.

  64. tenth street dreamer
    July 11, 2011 at 3:28 pm

    High Fi is really steamed this time. He can’t seem to accept the fact that his buddies are on the wrong side of this one. He has trouble with reality and truth. He is setting up his usual smoke screen, confusing the issue of Garr with good old boy Dave’s misdeeds. Black is white in their world. No wonder this country is so fucked up, with guys like Hi Fi and City hall at the helm. Full speed ahead and damn the truth.

  65. Down the Road
    July 11, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    Tra: It has occurred to me you are asking for proof of violation
    of the Brown Act. We have started an inquiry in San Francisco.
    We will be asking for an investigation. If this alleged violation
    did occur, which we are quite sure it did, it is a misdemeanor.
    We do have an witness.

    The eight years of records i mentioned above were about one
    area the city.

  66. tra
    July 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm

    DTR,

    What I had said (in a previous thread) was that if you have evidence of a violation of the Brown Act then you should follow up on it and take it to the appropriate enforcement agency (and/or file a civil suit).

    If I understand your 3:40 comment correctly, It sounds like you’re in the process of doing that, and if so, I’m glad to hear it. Please do keep us posted on your progress.

    If an official investigation gets underway, or a lawsuit is filed, or something like that, perhaps Heraldo would be interested in a “guest post” on that subject.

    Good luck!

  67. July 11, 2011 at 6:53 pm

    perhaps Heraldo would be interested in a “guest post” on that subject.

    Indeed.

  68. Anonymous
    July 11, 2011 at 6:54 pm

    Your witness, Linda, would be violating the law by disclosing closed session deliberations. Case closed.
    Next.

  69. grackle
    July 11, 2011 at 6:57 pm

    DTR: do you indeed have a copy of chief Neilsen’s contract? Does it have any phrase allowing at will firing? From what has been said over the last few weeks about the six months severance , I had assumed that this firing was covered in the contract??

  70. Matt
    July 11, 2011 at 7:29 pm

    Sign me up in the “laughing at the clown show” camp.

  71. funnygirl
    July 11, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    None of you have ever worked for a government board of directors. Know the rules, then comment. Or vomit. Or whatever. This is such a circle jerk.

  72. Anonymous
    July 11, 2011 at 8:43 pm

    “If this alleged violation
    did occur, which we are quite sure it did, it is a misdemeanor.
    We do have an witness. ”

    So, who would this witness be? Well, it would be Linda Atkins, who, if she is sure there as a violation, should go straight to to the fppc – not to DTR – if she went “downtheroad”, she’d be violating the brown act herself.

    DTR has taken different sections of the employment code and cobbled them together to make it fit his/her agenda. Sorry, doesnt work that way.

  73. tenth street dreamer
    July 11, 2011 at 9:41 pm

    A circle jerk it is. But our government, local, state, and national have taught us how it should be done. Around and around we go, thinking this is better than the tilt-a-whirl we used to ride as a kid. Circle jerking is also being on the edge of control, a bit dizzying and disorienting. But in the end we all get off and go about our business, but secretly hoping for another thrill.

  74. anon
    July 11, 2011 at 10:34 pm

    Just who is getting a thrill besides Tyson and his cronies? Certainly not the rest of us.

  75. Down the Road
    July 12, 2011 at 9:36 am

    No, the witness is not Linda Atkins. Yes, I do have a copy of the
    employment contract signed by Garr Nielsen. Yes, it does notice
    At Will Employment. But, You cannot have a At Will Employment
    Contract with a term limit on it. The contract violates California
    Labor Codes 2922 & 2924.

    This is not a clown show and Linda Atkins has conducted herself
    above board. What the clown show is: Is the apathy of this
    community to allow this gang of four or any other tight knit group
    to break any type of government statutes for their own benefit,
    or in case of firing Garr Nielsen, for their buddies benefit.

  76. Anonymous
    July 12, 2011 at 10:19 am

    Gang of Four? You mean the people elected in November. Stop disrespecting the people’s vote!

  77. The Big Picture
    July 12, 2011 at 11:23 am

    Half the eligible people voted in November.

    If media did its job and reported how the development community dominates local politics to maintain their special zoning favors and unfunded public subsidies for sprawl and big boxes, many more would register and participate.

    DTR is correct.

    Labor law is frequently undermined because the public pays the costs of settlements enabling bureaucrats to become judge, jury and executioner.

    Many employees walk away with a glowing recommendation convinced that they’ve signed a contract forfeiting their rights, just as many consumers are routinely fooled that they must enter arbitration.

    Subverting the law is why our courts are full, settlements are large, and insurance is costly.

  78. July 12, 2011 at 1:23 pm

    As noted many times before, 3/4 of the Gang were not elected by any meaningful amjority. Newman had barely 40% but ran against two other people who split the vote. Ciarabellini was APPOINTED. And Lance, who had NO oppostion, only polled 75%. Makes you wonder what the other 25% were doing.
    So play on, Clown Council. Someday they’ll strile the tent and there you will be, didling the elephant.

  79. July 12, 2011 at 1:25 pm

    Oops. That’s “strike the tent”.Must be a POLE-ISH joke!

  80. High Finance
    July 12, 2011 at 2:58 pm

    Once again you are not telling the truth Mouse.

    Newman had closer to 45% and Lance got something over 93%

    Since I have corrected you before on this and even provided links, I can only assume your “mistakes” are intentional.

  81. tra
    July 12, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    As noted many times before, 3/4 of the Gang were not elected by any meaningful amjority. Newman had barely 40% but ran against two other people who split the vote. Ciarabellini was APPOINTED. And Lance, who had NO oppostion, only polled 75%..

    “Many times before,” indeed. The endless recitiation of that familiar laundry list of excuses is beginning to sound like some kind of incantation, chanted over and over in the hope that somehow it will magically transform a major loss into something less than a major loss. The fact is, despite whatever spin people want to put on it, progressives In Eureka did not fare well in the last election.

    Ciarabellini was appointed, yes, but that’s because Jager won the Mayor’s race (and by a pretty healthy margin), and it’s also worth noting that Jager had previously won a majority when he was elected to the council. Brady won outright, against a well-known opponent who had a well-organized campaign — no way to spin that. It’s true that Newman only won with a plurality, but he did get more votes than either of the other two candidates. And sure, Madsen had no opposition at all…but whose fault is that? Not his.

    Look, I think it’s fair to say that the Gang of Four doesn’t have the most solid mandate — but it’s also fair to say that, as of right now, their opponents have even less of a mandate. That’s the cold, hard truth, and it won’t change until (at least) the next election. In my humble opinion, it would be better to focus on recruiting strong candidates, and on organizing and fundraising, rather than focusing on the coulda, woulda and shoulda of the last election.

  82. tenth street dreamer
    July 12, 2011 at 9:33 pm

    The people who were elected in Nov.? Lance had no opponent and Frank filled his vacated seat with an appointment. The gang is not a greatest example of a plurality. They, except for Linda, follow what ever King David says. He, after all, has the “institutional Knowledge” to keep Eureka on the path. He and his posse will crush any management style opposition and save the day. VICTORY PARADE STARTS AT K ST. THIS SATURDAY AT 10 A.M.

  83. High Finance
    July 13, 2011 at 8:48 am

    (yawn)

  84. anon
    July 13, 2011 at 10:31 am

    Hifi has a bit of the god complex that Tyson has. snore

  85. The Big Picture
    July 13, 2011 at 11:37 am

    tra says:
    July 12, 2011 at 3:03 pm

    ” In my humble opinion, it would be better to focus on recruiting strong candidates, and on organizing and fundraising, rather than focusing on the coulda, woulda and shoulda of the last election”.

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    While technically correct, you cannot dismiss the glaring fact that the opposition need not run strong candidates.

    Honestly, it was often difficult to understand what McKeller or Hunter-Meeks were mumbling! Worthen, Madsen, Wolford, Bass, Newman, Brady, Jones, Jager…strong leadership? Laughable. Glass filled an auditorium by organizing experts and PowerPoints in a public workshop on what’s possible for our future…Jager couldn’t organize a Cub Scout troupe for his “public visioning session”.

    Unless the topic is about abysmal voter participation or who dominates the process and why, it’s irrelevant. And a perpetual media blackout on those two points keeps it irrelevant.

    The game has been rigged for decades and is about to get worse.

  86. Curley
    July 14, 2011 at 12:24 pm

    If progressives are going back to the same old cadres to run for City Council or any other elected seats the result is going to be the same as in November. Progressives need some new faces that can be seen as independent and appeal to a broader electorate. And the personal attacks as seen here are counterproductive. I can’t support Linda, Larry, Neal, Caitlin or the like but am not at all crazy about the current electeds either. Please find someone that’s not in the divisive mode and I’ll be a happy camper. Just my 2 cents worth thank you. I’m not a very political person but I do love my City and want the best for us.

  87. July 14, 2011 at 5:10 pm

    “…the personal attacks as seen here are counterproductive.”

    Curley is right. And as Big Picture says above, “…it would be better to focus on recruiting strong candidates, and on organizing and fundraising…”

  88. tra
    July 14, 2011 at 9:18 pm

    Joel,

    Actually, Big Picture was quoting my 3:03 comment, and then BP went on to more or less disagree with that point, instead wallowing in more backward-looking self-pity and defeatism. Which is certainly understandable, and maybe somewhat justified, but certainly not very constructive.

  89. July 14, 2011 at 10:25 pm

    Until Big Picture shapes up, I’m following the advice of Curley.

  90. anonymous
    July 15, 2011 at 10:08 am

    Actually, Big Picture has an extremely accurate assessment of the local situation. 20 years of experience with Eureka politics is enough to make most progressives and Democrats give up in disgust.

    It’s easier to move out of Eureka than it is to change the heavily tilted process, stiffen the local media’s spines, or shame the electeds into actually doing what is in the best interests of the city as a whole.

  91. The Big Picture
    July 15, 2011 at 10:33 am

    “…wallowing in more backward-looking self-pity and defeatism.”

    Not so “humble”, eh, TRA 3:03PM?

    The local progressive community are largely agnostic, but can’t turnout in force unless it’s “Jesus”….meanwhile, our opponents repeatedly win “backward-looking and pitiful” mumblers.

    Call it what you will, blame whoever you like, but half the eligible electorate are not participating.

    Why should they?

    Neither our rigged political system nor its public costs are being reported.

    Larry Glass certainly understood this.

    Unlike his opponents who glide into office, our team must gather thousands of dollars, teams of speakers and experts, and manufacture our own video to educate voters ourselves….that airs on KEET repeatedly…months before the election.

    It’s reality, not self-pity or defeatism.

    Share the outrage and call the TS.

  92. OMG
    October 27, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    Barb Leonard says:
    July 10, 2011 at 12:34 pm
    Mathew Bass…..Jeff never had it in for Garr, in fact, he was sad to see him go but understood why it happened. Typically Jeff, he did not tell me why he wasn’t surprised, but I do know Tyson wasn’t the one calling the shots.

    BTW, instead of spreading more misinformation, why not tell us something truthful: i.e. you haven’t the faintest idea how Jeff feels about anything and there is NOT a world where personnel information is publicly divulged, therefore, it has to stay behind closed doors.

    If all this is so secret then how come an out of office councilman and his mommy know so much about it? OMG! How could Jeffey “understand why it happened” unless someone told him? If it is not a world where personnel info is divulged then how does Jeffey’s mommy know that Tyson wasn’t calling the shots?

    Barb you got some ‘splainin’ to do……

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s