The discrimination lawsuit filed by Shelbyville, KY police officer Bruce Gentry against the Oldham County Police Department is moving along. On February 16, 2009 Robert T. Watson, counsel for Oldham County filed a response for the county to the complaint filed by Gentry.
Essentially the response denies the allegations made by the plaintiff, Gentry. The response asks that the complaint be dismissed; that the county receive a trial by jury; that the county be awarded costs expended, including a reasonable attorney fee; and, any and all other relief to which it may appear appropriately entitled.
The issue that I quickly took note of was that both sides have asked for a jury trial. This is a plus for the public in my opinion. A jury trial should result in most facets of the case being explored by both sides. Therefore, the public should be afforded the opportunity to learn the entire story. The watchdog will continue to monitor this suit and keep you updated.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
SHOULD JUDGE MURNER RESIGN
Is it time for County Judge Executive Duane Murner to resign? Certainly, he should strongly consider it. How dare I speak those words! He won’t consider resigning because in his mind, he has done nothing wrong and nobody, not even the Attorney General or a court of law, can convince him that he has. After all, he is quoted in the Courier-Journal as having stated that nothing has ever been closed to the public in his administration. How can he say this after having been convicted of having an illegal closed session of the Fiscal Court?
Everyone now knows that Judge Murner has recently been found guilty of holding an illegal closed session of the Fiscal Court. But, how many people know that he was found to have led an illegal closed session of the Fiscal Court before? On December 1, 2004 the Kentucky Attorney General (04-OMD-225) held that the Oldham County Fiscal Court held an illegal meeting on November 2, 2004 and that Murner led the meeting. Judge Murner, who claims to have a Harvard degree, cannot plead ignorance. He is aware of the Open Meetings laws and chooses to ignore them when it is convenient for him and when it is in his best interest to keep the public from knowing what he is surreptiously doing.
Murner also tried to keep the name of George Rawlings as the anonymous donor a secret. He did this in the face of a Kentucky Supreme Court decision that clearly said that his actions were contrary to state law. He claims that he did not know that the Supreme Court decision was final. The fact is that the decision was final. However, even if the decision had not been final at the time that he refused to identify the donor, who did he think had the power to overturn the Kentucky Supreme Court? That defense put forth by him was just another attempt to circumvent the law and to refuse to do what was morally and ethically correct. It also revealed the arrogance that he has.
Now, the ill conceived decisions of Judge Murner have begun to cost the county money. Of course after all of Judge Murner’s tax increases there should be plenty of money to pay unnecessary attorney fees. Moreover, the amount of money the county is going to have to pay in attorney fees, court costs, and fines for the case involving the secret donor and the illegal meeting is pocket change compared to the money that the county will have to pay if it is found to have discriminated against the Shelbyville police officer whom it failed to hire because he has a military obligation. That will likely be tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. After reading the complaint, I believe that there is an extreme possibility that the county will lose that battle too.
All of the above does not speak well for Judge Murner’s leadership. As a matter of fact, it reflects to me that he has few, if any, leadership skills. I believe that Judge Murner should reimburse the county for the fees that it must pay as a result of his decisions that were not supported by law. Then, Judge Murner should resign for the sake of the people who live in Oldham County.
Also, let us not forget that seven other magistrates sat through the illegal meeting without saying a word. To the best of my knowledge not one of them stepped forward to assist Magistrate Scott Davis when he made his allegations. The next question that immediately comes to mind is, why didn’t any of them come forward? Were they ignorant, afraid of Judge Murner, in collusion with the Judge, or just didn’t care? The meeting discussed the sewer district and increases in sewer fees. Considering that Magistrate Rick Rash has a large constituency who are on sewers, one would think that he would have wanted to give them all of the facts and allowed them to voice their opinion. However, he chose to remain silent. Hopefully his opponent(s) and constituents will remember this when he seeks re-election.
Everyone now knows that Judge Murner has recently been found guilty of holding an illegal closed session of the Fiscal Court. But, how many people know that he was found to have led an illegal closed session of the Fiscal Court before? On December 1, 2004 the Kentucky Attorney General (04-OMD-225) held that the Oldham County Fiscal Court held an illegal meeting on November 2, 2004 and that Murner led the meeting. Judge Murner, who claims to have a Harvard degree, cannot plead ignorance. He is aware of the Open Meetings laws and chooses to ignore them when it is convenient for him and when it is in his best interest to keep the public from knowing what he is surreptiously doing.
Murner also tried to keep the name of George Rawlings as the anonymous donor a secret. He did this in the face of a Kentucky Supreme Court decision that clearly said that his actions were contrary to state law. He claims that he did not know that the Supreme Court decision was final. The fact is that the decision was final. However, even if the decision had not been final at the time that he refused to identify the donor, who did he think had the power to overturn the Kentucky Supreme Court? That defense put forth by him was just another attempt to circumvent the law and to refuse to do what was morally and ethically correct. It also revealed the arrogance that he has.
Now, the ill conceived decisions of Judge Murner have begun to cost the county money. Of course after all of Judge Murner’s tax increases there should be plenty of money to pay unnecessary attorney fees. Moreover, the amount of money the county is going to have to pay in attorney fees, court costs, and fines for the case involving the secret donor and the illegal meeting is pocket change compared to the money that the county will have to pay if it is found to have discriminated against the Shelbyville police officer whom it failed to hire because he has a military obligation. That will likely be tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. After reading the complaint, I believe that there is an extreme possibility that the county will lose that battle too.
All of the above does not speak well for Judge Murner’s leadership. As a matter of fact, it reflects to me that he has few, if any, leadership skills. I believe that Judge Murner should reimburse the county for the fees that it must pay as a result of his decisions that were not supported by law. Then, Judge Murner should resign for the sake of the people who live in Oldham County.
Also, let us not forget that seven other magistrates sat through the illegal meeting without saying a word. To the best of my knowledge not one of them stepped forward to assist Magistrate Scott Davis when he made his allegations. The next question that immediately comes to mind is, why didn’t any of them come forward? Were they ignorant, afraid of Judge Murner, in collusion with the Judge, or just didn’t care? The meeting discussed the sewer district and increases in sewer fees. Considering that Magistrate Rick Rash has a large constituency who are on sewers, one would think that he would have wanted to give them all of the facts and allowed them to voice their opinion. However, he chose to remain silent. Hopefully his opponent(s) and constituents will remember this when he seeks re-election.
Friday, February 13, 2009
MAGISTRATE SCOTT DAVIS VINDICATED BY CIRCUIT COURT
During the past few weeks several people have chastised Magistrate Scott Davis and me for challenging the secrecy of the Murner administration. Magistrate Scott Davis has been the recipient of the majority of the pejorative remarks. Further, many of those remarks have come from Magistrate David Voegele and more recently Voegele’s brother-in-law, former County Judge John Black.
Recent events have proven that Magistrate Scott Davis was more clairvoyant than any other person in the county. First, there was the issue of the Oldham Reserve. Davis openly stated that he thought that the deal with the Hocker group would fall through and that the county would not receive a penny from the proposed deal. That prediction turned out to be correct. Second, Magistrate Scott Davis was one of two magistrates to quickly realize that the people of Oldham County do not want an airport. The recent surveys taken by the Oldham Era and the professional survey company, ETC, proved that he and Magistrate Leslie were correct.
Then Magistrate Scott Davis realized that Judge Murner held an illegal meeting of the fiscal court under the guise that personnel would be the topic of the meeting. Magistrate Davis was the only magistrate to realize that the meeting was a sham and that it was illegal. At least he was the only one to speak up. Today, the Oldham County Circuit Court ruled that Magistrate Davis’ allegations were true. In the ruling, Judge Murner was ordered to publicize the minutes of the meeting and to pay for Magistrate Scott Davis’ attorney fees.
Last, Magistrate Scott Davis alleged that Judge Murner “willfully” withheld the name of an anonymous donor to the Oldham County Fiscal Court. In fact, Davis contended that Murner did this in the face of a Kentucky Supreme Court decision that clearly prohibited such action. Today the same Oldham County Circuit Court also ruled that the allegations made by Magistrate Davis were correct.
That makes four times that the position taken by Magistrate Scott Davis was found to be the correct position. Obviously, there are some people who are jealous of that fact. John Black went so far as to criticize Davis in the local newspaper. It is apparent that he owes Davis an apology. However, I doubt that will happen. I have now seen John Black for what he is. Although a lot of people disliked former Judge Mary Ellen Kinser, we can thank her for having the courage to challenge, and defeat, John Black. The people of this county do not need a leader who chastises other public officials for seeking the truth.
I would hope that today’s decisions by the Oldham County Circuit Court would finally give the credit and credence to Scott Davis that he deserves for his work. He has accomplished much more than the people could have expected from a first time holder of public office.
Recent events have proven that Magistrate Scott Davis was more clairvoyant than any other person in the county. First, there was the issue of the Oldham Reserve. Davis openly stated that he thought that the deal with the Hocker group would fall through and that the county would not receive a penny from the proposed deal. That prediction turned out to be correct. Second, Magistrate Scott Davis was one of two magistrates to quickly realize that the people of Oldham County do not want an airport. The recent surveys taken by the Oldham Era and the professional survey company, ETC, proved that he and Magistrate Leslie were correct.
Then Magistrate Scott Davis realized that Judge Murner held an illegal meeting of the fiscal court under the guise that personnel would be the topic of the meeting. Magistrate Davis was the only magistrate to realize that the meeting was a sham and that it was illegal. At least he was the only one to speak up. Today, the Oldham County Circuit Court ruled that Magistrate Davis’ allegations were true. In the ruling, Judge Murner was ordered to publicize the minutes of the meeting and to pay for Magistrate Scott Davis’ attorney fees.
Last, Magistrate Scott Davis alleged that Judge Murner “willfully” withheld the name of an anonymous donor to the Oldham County Fiscal Court. In fact, Davis contended that Murner did this in the face of a Kentucky Supreme Court decision that clearly prohibited such action. Today the same Oldham County Circuit Court also ruled that the allegations made by Magistrate Davis were correct.
That makes four times that the position taken by Magistrate Scott Davis was found to be the correct position. Obviously, there are some people who are jealous of that fact. John Black went so far as to criticize Davis in the local newspaper. It is apparent that he owes Davis an apology. However, I doubt that will happen. I have now seen John Black for what he is. Although a lot of people disliked former Judge Mary Ellen Kinser, we can thank her for having the courage to challenge, and defeat, John Black. The people of this county do not need a leader who chastises other public officials for seeking the truth.
I would hope that today’s decisions by the Oldham County Circuit Court would finally give the credit and credence to Scott Davis that he deserves for his work. He has accomplished much more than the people could have expected from a first time holder of public office.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
OLDHAM COUNTY CONSTABLE TO DO PARKING ENFORCEMENT
In November 2008 Charles “Chuck” McCarrick was elected Constable in Oldham County’s District 4 to fill a vacancy created when the then Constable moved out of the district. In Kentucky a constable has the same powers as the sheriff. Although elected to a magisterial district, the Constable can enforce laws and perform other tasks in the entire county.This constable is interested in doing parking enforcement.
This would be a volunteer effort without any compensation. The program will begin in LaGrange and then may be extended to the rest of the county.So far Constable McCarrick has been engaged in an educational program, leaving warning tags on the windshields of cars that are improperly parked. This can include cars parked in parking spaces for those with disabilities, that do not display either a hang tag or special plates; cars parked in fire lanes; cars parked in front of sidewalk ramps provided for persons with disabilities (curb cuts); or any other improper parking.
Starting soon Constable McCarrick will be writing citations for offenses he notes. The fine for improperly parking in a parking space for those with disabilities is $250. The fine for parking in a fire lane is generally $20 plus court costs of $143. The fine for most other violations is $20 with no court costs.
This would be a volunteer effort without any compensation. The program will begin in LaGrange and then may be extended to the rest of the county.So far Constable McCarrick has been engaged in an educational program, leaving warning tags on the windshields of cars that are improperly parked. This can include cars parked in parking spaces for those with disabilities, that do not display either a hang tag or special plates; cars parked in fire lanes; cars parked in front of sidewalk ramps provided for persons with disabilities (curb cuts); or any other improper parking.
Starting soon Constable McCarrick will be writing citations for offenses he notes. The fine for improperly parking in a parking space for those with disabilities is $250. The fine for parking in a fire lane is generally $20 plus court costs of $143. The fine for most other violations is $20 with no court costs.
Friday, February 6, 2009
MAGISTRATE VOEGELE TRIES FOR AN OSCAR
The Oldham County Airport Board hired ETC, a private company located in Kansas to conduct a survey to determine if the residents of Oldham County wanted a General Aviation airport. On February 3, 2009 the results of that survey were presented to the Oldham County Fiscal Court. Not surprisingly, the results overwhelmingly reflected that the residents of the county do not want an airport.
Many people will attempt to take credit for defeating the airport and the fact is that many people did do a lot to discourage the construction of an airport, especially members of NOA (No Oldham Airport). However, Magistrate David Voegele was not one of those people. Yet he took the opportunity to once again “grandstand” before the court after the presentation of the survey results. He even went so far as to threaten the airport board stating that if the board did not take action to bring an end to the airport, he would do so at the next meeting. Where has David Voegele been for the past year? He has had plenty of opportunities to make a proposal to stop the construction of an airport and has had two opportunities to vote to disband the airport board. Now he wants to threaten them? As an old saying goes, “he could have gone all day without saying what he said.”
While at least two other magistrates had the political courage to attempt to abolish the board after hearing from their constituents and studying the issue, Voegele lacked the political courage to take any action until he was hit in the face with a ten thousand dollar study conducted at taxpayer expense. It is even possible that Voegele would have continued to support the consideration of an airport, in the face of stiff opposition, if his support could have swayed County Judge Murner into funding the demolition of the Buckner Mall, a project Voegele has wanted completed at any cost.
In addition to Magistrates Scott Davis and Bob Leslie I heard at least three other magistrates express less than favorable opinions of the proposed airport. Magistrate Steve Greenwell even went to so far as to state that he was voting against the airport because his constituents were against it. Where was David Voegele? Waiting in the shadows to take a belated stand against the airport after everyone else did the work. While the people on the Fiscal Court who were known supporters of the airport were being gracious losers Magistrate Voegele was being a nasty self-imposed champion of the winners. He did this while none of the most adamant opponents of the airport said a word to the court or the board. Instead, they chose to wait until the following day for the final decision of the board.
As I have stated before, I feel certain that Magistrate Voegele wants to be the next County Judge. To accomplish that he needs to demonstrate leadership instead of sitting back and waiting for other people to do all of the work while he tries to take the credit for their effort.
Another interesting move made by Voegele occurred when Mr. Wade was nominated for a position on the Oldham LaGrange Development Authority. After the nomination was made Voegele came forth with reasons why he could not support Mr. Wade. I know nothing about Mr. Wade so I cannot take issue with the concerns that Magistrate Voegele had. However, knowing that Magistrate Voegele is prone to changing his position at the last moment I always watch to see what his final vote is. In this instance, the Judge, while taking the vote, asked the magistrates to signify if they were in favor of the nomination. To that there appeared to be eight votes of approval, including the Judge. When the Judge stated, “all opposed”, Voegele responded, “No.” Does that mean that he had changed his mind and was not opposed to the nomination? I think that he was against the nomination of Mr. Wade but with Magistrate Voegele one cannot be sure. In any event his vote was of no consequence.
Many people will attempt to take credit for defeating the airport and the fact is that many people did do a lot to discourage the construction of an airport, especially members of NOA (No Oldham Airport). However, Magistrate David Voegele was not one of those people. Yet he took the opportunity to once again “grandstand” before the court after the presentation of the survey results. He even went so far as to threaten the airport board stating that if the board did not take action to bring an end to the airport, he would do so at the next meeting. Where has David Voegele been for the past year? He has had plenty of opportunities to make a proposal to stop the construction of an airport and has had two opportunities to vote to disband the airport board. Now he wants to threaten them? As an old saying goes, “he could have gone all day without saying what he said.”
While at least two other magistrates had the political courage to attempt to abolish the board after hearing from their constituents and studying the issue, Voegele lacked the political courage to take any action until he was hit in the face with a ten thousand dollar study conducted at taxpayer expense. It is even possible that Voegele would have continued to support the consideration of an airport, in the face of stiff opposition, if his support could have swayed County Judge Murner into funding the demolition of the Buckner Mall, a project Voegele has wanted completed at any cost.
In addition to Magistrates Scott Davis and Bob Leslie I heard at least three other magistrates express less than favorable opinions of the proposed airport. Magistrate Steve Greenwell even went to so far as to state that he was voting against the airport because his constituents were against it. Where was David Voegele? Waiting in the shadows to take a belated stand against the airport after everyone else did the work. While the people on the Fiscal Court who were known supporters of the airport were being gracious losers Magistrate Voegele was being a nasty self-imposed champion of the winners. He did this while none of the most adamant opponents of the airport said a word to the court or the board. Instead, they chose to wait until the following day for the final decision of the board.
As I have stated before, I feel certain that Magistrate Voegele wants to be the next County Judge. To accomplish that he needs to demonstrate leadership instead of sitting back and waiting for other people to do all of the work while he tries to take the credit for their effort.
Another interesting move made by Voegele occurred when Mr. Wade was nominated for a position on the Oldham LaGrange Development Authority. After the nomination was made Voegele came forth with reasons why he could not support Mr. Wade. I know nothing about Mr. Wade so I cannot take issue with the concerns that Magistrate Voegele had. However, knowing that Magistrate Voegele is prone to changing his position at the last moment I always watch to see what his final vote is. In this instance, the Judge, while taking the vote, asked the magistrates to signify if they were in favor of the nomination. To that there appeared to be eight votes of approval, including the Judge. When the Judge stated, “all opposed”, Voegele responded, “No.” Does that mean that he had changed his mind and was not opposed to the nomination? I think that he was against the nomination of Mr. Wade but with Magistrate Voegele one cannot be sure. In any event his vote was of no consequence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)