On December 15, 2009 the Oldham County Fiscal Court gave its blessing to the 28 percent increase in the water rate for the residents of Oldham County. No, the court did not set the rate but Judge-Executive Duane Murner nominated both Jay Hall and Robert Durbin for reappointment to serve on the board of the Oldham County Water District. Both of those men were on the board that set the new rate resulting in a 28 percent increase in water rates for all Oldham County customers.
Magistrate Scott Davis commented to the court prior to the vote concerning his disappointment and displeasure with the recent decisions of the Water District Board. He stated that he felt the board should have more carefully considered the opportunity to partner with the Louisville Water Company and lower the amount of its rate increase. Magistrate Davis has also stated his objections to the water district spending millions of dollars to increase capacity to serve developers at the ratepayers (customers) expense. Judge-Executive Murner even had the audacity to say that he did not favor the increase in water rates but that the control of the water rates was not within the jurisdiction of the Fiscal Court. In fact, that is an oversimplification of the matter at hand. While Fiscal Court does not set the water rates, they control who is on the Water District Board.
On Tuesday, all members of the Fiscal Court, including Judge-Executive Murner, were aware that the nominees for the Water District Board were previously part of the board that set the new rates resulting in the 28 percent increase. All members of the court had an opportunity to voice their objection to the huge rate increase. However, only Magistrate Scott Davis voiced his objections over the increase. He stated that since the nominees had been part of the board that increased the water rates by 28 percent he could not vote for them. Obviously the other members of the court did not share his displeasure. Without any comment the entire court voted to approve the nominations with the exception of Magistrate Scott Davis.
It is to be noted that the Water District Board has clearly stated in writing that one of the purposes of increasing the rate is to fund more infrastructure for development. Jay Hall is also a family member of one of the largest volume developers and real estate agents in Oldham County, Steve Hall. Jay’s wife, Deborah, contributed the personal maximum contribution of $1,000 to Paula Gish for her campaign for Judge-Executive on 9/17/2009. Karen Hall, the wife of Steve Hall, also donated $1,000 to Paula Gish for Judge-Executive on 9/17/2009. Are you getting the picture here? Did Jay Hall use his position as a member of the Oldham County Water District Board to expand infrastructure for future development to subsidize his own industry? We’ll let you be the judge of that, but the answer seems pretty clear. When testifying before the Fiscal Court, the Water District Board stated service for people in Oldham County would not be enhanced. Yet everyone in the county will pay dearly in order to construct new infrastructure for future development. I continue to tell people to ask themselves, “What will new development do for me?” I can tell you that it has and continues to cost you dearly.
In May the residents of Oldham County will have the opportunity to let their elected magistrate know how they feel about the cavalier attitude that the magistrates frequently show about the financial welfare of their constituents. Hopefully, they take the opportunity to do so.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
IS HARRISON TRYING TO HIDE SOMETHING
Recently I have come into possession of a letter sent out by J. Albert Harrison seeking campaign contributions and support for his campaign to become the Property Valuation Administrator (PVA) of Oldham County. This letter raises several interesting questions.
First, Mr. Harrison states that he feels privileged to serve Oldham County in a “manner” similar to his military service. He does not elaborate on that
statement. While Mr. Harrison is certainly deserving of the appreciation of all citizens for his defense of this country in a time of war, his military service is not connected or similar to what the position of the PVA would require.
Second, Mr. Harrison states that he successfully took the required exam for the office of PVA and therefore is now fully qualified as a candidate. While he may be qualified under the color of law, that by no means proves that he is a qualified candidate by way of experience. As I have stated in the past, the qualifications of any candidate for any office are very subjective. That decision is best left up to the voters.
Without question the most interesting part of Mr. Harrison’s letter is that he has chosen to limit contributions by way of personal checks to a maximum of $100. He goes on to state that cash contributions are limited by statute to $50 per person. Harrison states that there are definite reasons for the limits. His first reason is: “First is my belief in allowing many supporters, not just a chosen few, to make contributions at a level that is not a financial burden.” This statement is incredulous. If he had no limitation on the size of donations that would not prevent anyone from supporting him. Harrison’s second reason is: “Second, with these limits I am not required to list donors' names and occupations.” Is he saying that he is too lazy too list the names? Is he saying that he wants to conceal the identity of his supporters? Is he trying to hide something? Frankly, I don’t know the answer but I certainly would like to know why he is choosing to be less than forthright with the identity of his supporters. There is an old adage that says, “The appearance of impropriety is sometimes worse than the impropriety itself.” I certainly hope that is true in this situation.
Harrison states that his reporting to the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance entails only the total amount given and the aggregate number of contributors. He states that this method is a provision within the election regulations to encourage grass-roots giving. I certainly take issue with his statements. You don't need to limit contributions in order to encourage grass-roots support.
It can easily be argued that a candidate for election does not want to openly accept contributions in excess of $100 in order for the candidate to conceal the true identity of the donors to his campaign. This allows a candidate to accept contributions of any amount, for example, $5000, and claim that the donation was given by 50 individual donors. Certainly this is illegal but is certainly not outside the realm of possibility. Further, when a candidate does not publicize his contributors, he obscures the identity of any special interest group that may be supporting him.
In the past I have raised questions about the development industry in Oldham County and the attempt of that industry to control the politics within the County. A review of the past history of contributions from the development industry certainly reflects that the industry has been more than generous to candidates who support its positions on many issues. It is no secret that Mr. Harrison had been closely tied to developers and has been a supporter of the developers. I certainly hope that he is not using his contribution limitations to obscure support from any special interest group. This is a situation that certainly needs to be monitored. If Mr. Harrison were to try to conceal the identity of his supporters from the voters, it would certainly negate any glitter that he is deserving of for his military service.
Finally, Mr. Harrison states, “…I will operate the PVA office within all legal elements of the law to include recognizing and avoiding any aspects of nepotism”. He is clearly taking a shot at the current PVA, Ron Winters, due to the fact that Mr. Winters employs his wife, Barbara. Mr. Winters was cleared of this charge. Further, Barbara Winters took the qualifying exam for the PVA position at the same time that Mr. Harrison took the exam and she also passed it. It goes without saying that if Mr. Harrison considers himself qualified by virtue of having passed the PVA exam, Ms. Winters is also qualified. Besides, she has much more experience than he does but he is the one asking voters to put him in the PVA position. So, what is his beef?
One last comment, Mr. Harrison states that he can be contacted by using the contact information on his letterhead. I doubt that he can be contacted using the email address on the letterhead as it has two dots between “att and net.” I know that is being picky but I believe that Mr. Harrison fired the first shot by using the term “nepotism.”
First, Mr. Harrison states that he feels privileged to serve Oldham County in a “manner” similar to his military service. He does not elaborate on that
statement. While Mr. Harrison is certainly deserving of the appreciation of all citizens for his defense of this country in a time of war, his military service is not connected or similar to what the position of the PVA would require.
Second, Mr. Harrison states that he successfully took the required exam for the office of PVA and therefore is now fully qualified as a candidate. While he may be qualified under the color of law, that by no means proves that he is a qualified candidate by way of experience. As I have stated in the past, the qualifications of any candidate for any office are very subjective. That decision is best left up to the voters.
Without question the most interesting part of Mr. Harrison’s letter is that he has chosen to limit contributions by way of personal checks to a maximum of $100. He goes on to state that cash contributions are limited by statute to $50 per person. Harrison states that there are definite reasons for the limits. His first reason is: “First is my belief in allowing many supporters, not just a chosen few, to make contributions at a level that is not a financial burden.” This statement is incredulous. If he had no limitation on the size of donations that would not prevent anyone from supporting him. Harrison’s second reason is: “Second, with these limits I am not required to list donors' names and occupations.” Is he saying that he is too lazy too list the names? Is he saying that he wants to conceal the identity of his supporters? Is he trying to hide something? Frankly, I don’t know the answer but I certainly would like to know why he is choosing to be less than forthright with the identity of his supporters. There is an old adage that says, “The appearance of impropriety is sometimes worse than the impropriety itself.” I certainly hope that is true in this situation.
Harrison states that his reporting to the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance entails only the total amount given and the aggregate number of contributors. He states that this method is a provision within the election regulations to encourage grass-roots giving. I certainly take issue with his statements. You don't need to limit contributions in order to encourage grass-roots support.
It can easily be argued that a candidate for election does not want to openly accept contributions in excess of $100 in order for the candidate to conceal the true identity of the donors to his campaign. This allows a candidate to accept contributions of any amount, for example, $5000, and claim that the donation was given by 50 individual donors. Certainly this is illegal but is certainly not outside the realm of possibility. Further, when a candidate does not publicize his contributors, he obscures the identity of any special interest group that may be supporting him.
In the past I have raised questions about the development industry in Oldham County and the attempt of that industry to control the politics within the County. A review of the past history of contributions from the development industry certainly reflects that the industry has been more than generous to candidates who support its positions on many issues. It is no secret that Mr. Harrison had been closely tied to developers and has been a supporter of the developers. I certainly hope that he is not using his contribution limitations to obscure support from any special interest group. This is a situation that certainly needs to be monitored. If Mr. Harrison were to try to conceal the identity of his supporters from the voters, it would certainly negate any glitter that he is deserving of for his military service.
Finally, Mr. Harrison states, “…I will operate the PVA office within all legal elements of the law to include recognizing and avoiding any aspects of nepotism”. He is clearly taking a shot at the current PVA, Ron Winters, due to the fact that Mr. Winters employs his wife, Barbara. Mr. Winters was cleared of this charge. Further, Barbara Winters took the qualifying exam for the PVA position at the same time that Mr. Harrison took the exam and she also passed it. It goes without saying that if Mr. Harrison considers himself qualified by virtue of having passed the PVA exam, Ms. Winters is also qualified. Besides, she has much more experience than he does but he is the one asking voters to put him in the PVA position. So, what is his beef?
One last comment, Mr. Harrison states that he can be contacted by using the contact information on his letterhead. I doubt that he can be contacted using the email address on the letterhead as it has two dots between “att and net.” I know that is being picky but I believe that Mr. Harrison fired the first shot by using the term “nepotism.”
Thursday, November 26, 2009
MAGISTRATE DAVID VOEGELE ENTERS RACE FOR COUNTY JUDGE
Magistrate David Voegele has entered the race for County Judge. Thus, he becomes the second candidate to officially file for the race. Stan Clark had filed papers indicating that he was going to run but has never officially filed for the office and I do not believe that he will.
The county is fortunate that Voegele has entered the race. No position should be uncontested. Voegele enters the race with a lot less financial backing. However, I have found Voegele to be a very energetic person with a lot of novel ideas and a person who is not afraid to push for his ideas. Unfortunately I have not heard of any novel ideas from Paula Gish. It is as though she has never had an original thought. That equates to another four years of the “tax and spend” policies of the failed Murner administration. Without the heavy financing of the developers there would be no race, Voegele would win hands down. With the development money Gish starts with a slight edge. If Voegele can engage Gish in a dialogue,that edge will quickly fade. I suspect that she will use the old “duck and cover” method of running. She will not say anything – just use the developers’ money to get her name in front of the people.
I have heard many people speak very unfavorably of Paula Gish. Those people now have a choice. If nobody else enters the race, it will interesting to see if those anti-Gish people will get behind David Voegele.
The county is fortunate that Voegele has entered the race. No position should be uncontested. Voegele enters the race with a lot less financial backing. However, I have found Voegele to be a very energetic person with a lot of novel ideas and a person who is not afraid to push for his ideas. Unfortunately I have not heard of any novel ideas from Paula Gish. It is as though she has never had an original thought. That equates to another four years of the “tax and spend” policies of the failed Murner administration. Without the heavy financing of the developers there would be no race, Voegele would win hands down. With the development money Gish starts with a slight edge. If Voegele can engage Gish in a dialogue,that edge will quickly fade. I suspect that she will use the old “duck and cover” method of running. She will not say anything – just use the developers’ money to get her name in front of the people.
I have heard many people speak very unfavorably of Paula Gish. Those people now have a choice. If nobody else enters the race, it will interesting to see if those anti-Gish people will get behind David Voegele.
Monday, November 23, 2009
OFFICER TOM DOUGLAS TO RESUME DUTIES AS OLDHAM POLICE OFFICER
I received information that Officer Tom Douglas will resume his duties as an Oldham County Police Officer on November 30, 2009.
Douglas had been scheduled to plead to additional charges levied against him today. However, all charges have been dismissed. I am sure that he is happy to have his job and will be happy to return to work. He knows that he has made mistakes and has willingly admitted those mistakes. I am also sure that he has learned valuable lessons from those errors.
I believe that the Chief of the Oldham County Police Department made the right decision in deciding to dismiss the charges. Perhaps everyone can now move on and pursue their work. That would benefit all of the residents of Oldham County. Hopefully this proves to be a good day for Oldham County
Douglas had been scheduled to plead to additional charges levied against him today. However, all charges have been dismissed. I am sure that he is happy to have his job and will be happy to return to work. He knows that he has made mistakes and has willingly admitted those mistakes. I am also sure that he has learned valuable lessons from those errors.
I believe that the Chief of the Oldham County Police Department made the right decision in deciding to dismiss the charges. Perhaps everyone can now move on and pursue their work. That would benefit all of the residents of Oldham County. Hopefully this proves to be a good day for Oldham County
Saturday, November 21, 2009
DUANE: HALLOWEEN IS OVER – IT’S TIME TO STOP THE WITCH HUNT
The time has come, long ago, to replace the top management of the Oldham County Police Department. The dissension is high and the morale low within the department. In sports there is a saying that goes something like “It is easier to replace the coach than to replace the entire team.”
Unfortunately, these problems go even deeper. Anyone that knows anything about the way that the county is managed knows that Chief Mike Griffin does nothing without the blessing of Judge-Executive Duane Murner. Thus, Murner is clearly part of the problem. Once again, Murner is demonstrating his disregard for the law as is Police Chief Mike Griffin. Murner is no stranger to disregarding authority and the law. He openly stated that he would defy the Supreme Court. After being ordered by an Oldham County Circuit Judge to release certain information to Magistrate Scott Davis, he refused to do so until the eleventh hour at which time he knew that he would be held in contempt of court.
At the present time, it appears that Chief Griffin disregarded the law when he made the decision not to hire Officer Bruce Gentry, who was an applicant from the Shelbyville Police Department. Gentry alleged that the county discriminated against him due to his military service obligations. If that allegation is found to be true Murner and Griffin jointly made a poor decision. In my opinion Murner simply has no regard for the law. He reminds me of a “mad dictator”. If you cross his path, he will try to crush you. The people in Oldham County should be concerned. What is worse is that he wants the people to elect Paula Gish to succeed him. That would allow Murner to be more covert while continuing to control the office of County Judge-Executive and using her as a pawn. Quite frankly, Oldham County cannot afford or handle any additional leadership by this man.
On October 28, 2009 the Oldham County Police Merit Board found that Oldham County Police Chief Mike Griffin had not interpreted the administrative rules of the Oldham County Police Department correctly when he terminated Officer Tom Douglas. Therefore, the Board ordered that Officer Douglas be reinstated and given full back pay. He was also given a suspension. As of this date Officer Douglas has not been reinstated although he is being paid. Did the Chief and the County Judge not understand the order of the Merit Board? They understood but they don’t want to follow legal orders. If they thought that the Board erred, then they should have appealed the decision but they have not done so.
Now the County is trying to charge Officer Douglas with two additional violations and suspend him again. Keep in mind that Officer Douglas has not worked since May of 2009. Thus, the violations happened prior to the Merit Board hearing. As a matter of fact, the additional violations were mentioned at the hearing but were not pursued by the county attorney. Although I do not have the transcription in front of me, I believe that the Merit Board sustained a motion by the attorney for Officer Douglas to dismiss these new charges. Again, the County could have appealed that if it did not agree with the decision. However, that would have taken the matter out of their control and they do not have a good track record when they do not have total control.
In my article of October 28, 2000 I stated that I would not want to be in Officer Douglas’s position. I said that because I knew that Chief Griffin and Lt. Col. Billy Way would have him under a microscope. However, I did not believe that they would go so far as to try to keep him from going back to work. This has all of the earmarks of a witch hunt.
The actions of the management of the Oldham County Police Department reflect those of a sadistic bully that can’t lose and move on. The people of Oldham County are going to suffer. They may not know it but the quality of policing will go downhill. The people of Oldham County need to step forward to support the police department. We are nearing the 2010 election cycle. Those people seeking public office should make their feelings known on this matter. It is a great opportunity for them to demonstrate the ability to lead. However, I doubt that many will step up to the plate.
I have heard that the officers of the Oldham County Police Department have been told not to talk to the magistrates – and to me. This is scary! In fact, the top management of the Police Department does not want Magistrates speaking with or inquiring about information from anyone below them in their department. Are Chief Griffin and Lt. Col Way trying to implement communism? When police officers are forced to work in a “police state” the public can expect that to trickle down to them. It is an accepted fact that children who have been abused are more likely to abuse their children. Oldham County, you had better wake up!
Lest I should forget, let us not forget that Judge-Executive Duane Murner also recently fired Mitch Nobles, the county’s code enforcement officer. Further, when Murner called the Nobles into his office to fire him, after Nobles returned from a vacation, the police were there to escort him from Murner’s office. Was Murner afraid of Nobles? I have not heard anyone speak badly of Nobles nor his performance. From the information that I have received, that firing was not justified either and it did not follow the procedures outlined in the employee handbook for discipline. Murner is quick to fire the people who can not fight back, but reluctant to take any action against his Chief of Police. I don’t believe that Murner desires to remove his Chief of Police even though it is apparent that the police department is not functioning as well as it should be functioning and conditions appear to be worsening.
Let us recap some of Murner’s personnel actions. Shortly after taking office he removed ten low-level employees. He alleged that he was saving the county money. However, his personnel decisions since then have reflected that he has no problem wasting county funds when approving decisions. The best example of monetary waste is the refusal to hire Bruce Gentry, a Shelbyville police officer who had applied for and was hired for a position with the Oldham County Police Department. Gentry alleged in Federal Court documents that his offer of employment was retracted because he had a military commitment. If that proves to be true it will cost the county more money than it will ever save by dismissing the ten low-level employees. Did Murner and Griffin make this decision based upon the fact that they didn’t want to be burdened with having to work around the scheduling requirements of our military?
Then there was the code enforcement officer and now Officer Tom Douglas. It is time that the managers in Oldham County learn that it is their job to manage people, not to fire them. The hiring process for police officers is quite expensive, as is the dismissal process. Of course when you are wasting taxpayer money it doesn’t seem to matter – at least not to some department managers in Oldham County.
Unfortunately, these problems go even deeper. Anyone that knows anything about the way that the county is managed knows that Chief Mike Griffin does nothing without the blessing of Judge-Executive Duane Murner. Thus, Murner is clearly part of the problem. Once again, Murner is demonstrating his disregard for the law as is Police Chief Mike Griffin. Murner is no stranger to disregarding authority and the law. He openly stated that he would defy the Supreme Court. After being ordered by an Oldham County Circuit Judge to release certain information to Magistrate Scott Davis, he refused to do so until the eleventh hour at which time he knew that he would be held in contempt of court.
At the present time, it appears that Chief Griffin disregarded the law when he made the decision not to hire Officer Bruce Gentry, who was an applicant from the Shelbyville Police Department. Gentry alleged that the county discriminated against him due to his military service obligations. If that allegation is found to be true Murner and Griffin jointly made a poor decision. In my opinion Murner simply has no regard for the law. He reminds me of a “mad dictator”. If you cross his path, he will try to crush you. The people in Oldham County should be concerned. What is worse is that he wants the people to elect Paula Gish to succeed him. That would allow Murner to be more covert while continuing to control the office of County Judge-Executive and using her as a pawn. Quite frankly, Oldham County cannot afford or handle any additional leadership by this man.
On October 28, 2009 the Oldham County Police Merit Board found that Oldham County Police Chief Mike Griffin had not interpreted the administrative rules of the Oldham County Police Department correctly when he terminated Officer Tom Douglas. Therefore, the Board ordered that Officer Douglas be reinstated and given full back pay. He was also given a suspension. As of this date Officer Douglas has not been reinstated although he is being paid. Did the Chief and the County Judge not understand the order of the Merit Board? They understood but they don’t want to follow legal orders. If they thought that the Board erred, then they should have appealed the decision but they have not done so.
Now the County is trying to charge Officer Douglas with two additional violations and suspend him again. Keep in mind that Officer Douglas has not worked since May of 2009. Thus, the violations happened prior to the Merit Board hearing. As a matter of fact, the additional violations were mentioned at the hearing but were not pursued by the county attorney. Although I do not have the transcription in front of me, I believe that the Merit Board sustained a motion by the attorney for Officer Douglas to dismiss these new charges. Again, the County could have appealed that if it did not agree with the decision. However, that would have taken the matter out of their control and they do not have a good track record when they do not have total control.
In my article of October 28, 2000 I stated that I would not want to be in Officer Douglas’s position. I said that because I knew that Chief Griffin and Lt. Col. Billy Way would have him under a microscope. However, I did not believe that they would go so far as to try to keep him from going back to work. This has all of the earmarks of a witch hunt.
The actions of the management of the Oldham County Police Department reflect those of a sadistic bully that can’t lose and move on. The people of Oldham County are going to suffer. They may not know it but the quality of policing will go downhill. The people of Oldham County need to step forward to support the police department. We are nearing the 2010 election cycle. Those people seeking public office should make their feelings known on this matter. It is a great opportunity for them to demonstrate the ability to lead. However, I doubt that many will step up to the plate.
I have heard that the officers of the Oldham County Police Department have been told not to talk to the magistrates – and to me. This is scary! In fact, the top management of the Police Department does not want Magistrates speaking with or inquiring about information from anyone below them in their department. Are Chief Griffin and Lt. Col Way trying to implement communism? When police officers are forced to work in a “police state” the public can expect that to trickle down to them. It is an accepted fact that children who have been abused are more likely to abuse their children. Oldham County, you had better wake up!
Lest I should forget, let us not forget that Judge-Executive Duane Murner also recently fired Mitch Nobles, the county’s code enforcement officer. Further, when Murner called the Nobles into his office to fire him, after Nobles returned from a vacation, the police were there to escort him from Murner’s office. Was Murner afraid of Nobles? I have not heard anyone speak badly of Nobles nor his performance. From the information that I have received, that firing was not justified either and it did not follow the procedures outlined in the employee handbook for discipline. Murner is quick to fire the people who can not fight back, but reluctant to take any action against his Chief of Police. I don’t believe that Murner desires to remove his Chief of Police even though it is apparent that the police department is not functioning as well as it should be functioning and conditions appear to be worsening.
Let us recap some of Murner’s personnel actions. Shortly after taking office he removed ten low-level employees. He alleged that he was saving the county money. However, his personnel decisions since then have reflected that he has no problem wasting county funds when approving decisions. The best example of monetary waste is the refusal to hire Bruce Gentry, a Shelbyville police officer who had applied for and was hired for a position with the Oldham County Police Department. Gentry alleged in Federal Court documents that his offer of employment was retracted because he had a military commitment. If that proves to be true it will cost the county more money than it will ever save by dismissing the ten low-level employees. Did Murner and Griffin make this decision based upon the fact that they didn’t want to be burdened with having to work around the scheduling requirements of our military?
Then there was the code enforcement officer and now Officer Tom Douglas. It is time that the managers in Oldham County learn that it is their job to manage people, not to fire them. The hiring process for police officers is quite expensive, as is the dismissal process. Of course when you are wasting taxpayer money it doesn’t seem to matter – at least not to some department managers in Oldham County.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)