Comments on: County counsel denies Brown Act violation

By: Melody

Melody — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 04:49:55 +0000

Joe Harn was right on target with his comments. The Mtn. Demo and Lou Green are obviously biased. Lots of BOS hanky-panky going on under the direction of County Counsel. Note the video was posted, but not the minutes, likely because of the controversial subject matter. These public comments & documents SHOULD appear as attachments to Open Forum when they are finally posted to the BOS website: “My purpose this morning is to address Brown Act violations, particularly the censoring of the October 23rd Item #17 relevant to the Assistant CAO, DOT and Development Services materials that were formally submitted to the Clerk of the Board and posted to the BOS Agenda for the public record.

You’ll recall that was the meeting when Jack Sweeney seized the opportunity to threaten me, “Melody, you need to relinquish that or we’re going to have to call an officer to get you out of here. You’re done. The rules say you’re done. Now be polite and go sit down. If somebody wants to answer you, they will. In the meantime other people need to have a chance to speak.”

Ron Briggs then leaned over to Chairman John Knight commenting to just adjourn the meeting. Without a second motion, Jack announced the meeting adjourned and everyone exited the room. It appeared you all thought it was pretty hilarious.

For the record, I was well within my Constitutional rights and appropriate time limits. It was the Board that was out of order in their arrogant display of tyranny.

The submitted materials included incriminating information that citizens have the right to know about their public servants. That correspondence has since been removed from both the agenda and the minutes on the BOS website. Those items are also relevant to Item #43 of today’s Agenda.

As a reminder, you are accountable to the citizens of this county and are hereby put on notice. I’m confident County Counsel is well aware of the potential for litigation.

Madam Clerk: Please ensure these materials are properly posted for the public record along with the other documents that were submitted for item #17 of the October 23rd Agenda.

Do you have any questions or comments at this time?” (**The previously submitted items have since been reposted to the 10/23 Agenda on the BOS website)

By: James Smith

James Smith — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 17:42:39 +0000

Here’s the response to the Amador Grand Jury about Kim Kerr:

http://www.voiceinione.com/Documents/GrandJuryReports/2011-2012/2011-2012GJR-Response.pdf

By: Echo Chamber

Echo Chamber — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 17:13:54 +0000

holey moley, Mr Smith … everything leads to everything else in EDC

By: James Smith

James Smith — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:38:04 +0000

The Grand Jury will never investigate because Briggs brotherinlaw is the head of the Grand Jury.

By: 1036-Frank

1036-Frank — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:13:40 +0000

There is also that little thing called a Grand Jury Report from Amador County that seems to have been overlooked by the stooges who were supposed to conduct background employment checks prior to hiring, now we have secret back-room raises not on the printed agenda at the BOS, looks like the county is returning to some old ways of incompetency, where is the local Grand Jury? Are they still being told what to look into and what to keep quiet?

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 20:59:59 +0000

P.S. Qualified Czars are expensive.

By: Evelyn

Evelyn — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 20:59:10 +0000

Ah . . . Dink, but the County met the 20 word minimum requirement. So why complain?

By: Dink Lane

Dink Lane — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 20:54:00 +0000

Don’t you just love it…. Raises for the top-earners in the county (In SECRET no less) and turning around and tell the residents…. Waaa We can’t afford to fix roads or process your paperwork….