May the face of every good news and the back of every bad news be towards us.
I see in today’s Press that Charlie Nipp is still digging to find anyone and everyone that might have talked to Senator Mike Jorgenson about issues with LCDC. Can you think of a good Irish saying for Charlie?
Any other thoughts, comments or ideas?
The sad thing about CDA’s wunderkind is that none of this – NONE OF THIS – would have happened had the City Council and Mayor exercised even a modicum of oversight of the LCDC.
Comment by Dan — March 14, 2009 @ 8:39 am
Apparently St. Charlie the Nipp really is as dumb as dirt. Had he just let this go, given the very short public memory, it would have gone away. But the “culture of fear” that this group uses as intimidation, just comes naturally. St. Charlie clearly wants to retaliate against absolutely everyone who had the nerve to question his and the councils behavior. Now his attorney knows that “face your accuser” doesn’t apply in this case. But a fee is a fee. The AG was asked to look into this situation to determine if criminality applied. As he said it did not, neither charge nor indictment occurred. Therefore St. Charlie has no right to private correspondence. It really goes a step further and everyone should be very concerned. If all this correspondence is turned over to him, the public will be losing their right to privately voice their concerns to their elected officials. Talk about intimidation, I’ve said it before, these people are masters of the art.
Comment by Faringdon — March 14, 2009 @ 9:14 am
Seems to me, not being an attorney, that Senator Jorgenson brought the question to the Attorney General who, after looking into it, decided to conduct a full investigation and publish a public report. Therefore, isn’t Jorgenson “the accuser”? And he’s been very up front about his role in representing his constituents. I admire his willingness to stand up against this type of intimidation.
Comment by mary — March 14, 2009 @ 11:09 am
Here’s an Irish saying for Charlie: ” May your anger set with the sun and not rise again with it.”
Comment by mary — March 14, 2009 @ 11:16 am
Well this one is going to be interesting without a doubt. Since Jorgenson is a public official – I don’t think his correspondence is private.
Scott Reed represented the plaintiff in one case out of Bonner County that was eventually settled out of court because the sheriff’s department was recording cordless telephone conversations. It was a doozy – I am sure he remembers it.
According to Idaho public records laws, I believe Nipp can ask for them or at least try to force Jorgenson to hand over his information. Sounds like Nipp might be looking for a libel suit.
If that happens Jorgenson might argue that it violates the safety/privacy of the accusers and the accusations were made in good faith. Allen Derr is most likely the only other public records law attorney out there. I would call him.
9-335.Exemptions from disclosure — Confidentiality.
None of this is legal advice. I am just a bloke who has been worked over by the public records law and the misuse of it and I am not rich enough or important enough to get a case. But, I know how to file a district court case and get the
damn things sealed.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 14, 2009 @ 11:41 am
Sure Mary, here is a good Irish saying for Charlie:
HAVE FAITH, HE’LL GORE YA!
Comment by Gary Ingram — March 14, 2009 @ 12:20 pm
Then let Nipp know. Sheesh. It’s not like he’s going to intimidate the “accusers” or have connections in government shut down their business or get them fired. Not Charlie. He wouldn’t do that.
Comment by Dan — March 14, 2009 @ 12:36 pm
Thank you Dan!
I do not know what the “spin” will ultimately be, however I do know that there was no accusation. There was an inquiry as to Nipps position. A person could have said (ie) that he/she thinks there might be some wrong doing. But nothing that rises to the legal definition of an accusation can be made without evidentiary backup. To say “I think” is not to say “I accuse”.
As for the Senators correspondance being in the public purview in this case, that is really reaching. One does not give up the right to privacy by becoming an elected official. ie: should the Senators emails to his wife on this subject be made public? Same difference. There is a huge difference between public and private correspondance. Even if the argument could be made that the Senators correspondance is public, the same argument does not apply to the private citizen at the other end. All of that being said, knowing how things work in this place, I’ll be darned if I would ever put anything in writing to a public official. If I have a question, it will be face to face or not at all.
Comment by Faringdon — March 14, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
Forgot…Mary the Senator did not make an accusation. He asked the AG to examine the facts and make a ruling as to the legal position. And that was the proper action for him to take.
Comment by Faringdon — March 14, 2009 @ 1:42 pm
Sorry, Faringdon, I didn’t mean to give you the wrong impression. I don’t think Sen. Jorgenson “accused” Mr. Nipp of anything. I think the Senator rightfully brought a legitimate question to the Attorney General. From what I’ve read and heard, the question(s) on this were from many citizens and also from other legislators. It was the AG’s office that reviewed the situation and decided an investigation was warranted. their findings showed violations of the state statutes, but no criminal charges.
Comment by mary — March 14, 2009 @ 2:29 pm
I am disappointed in Scott Reed. He has been often been active in helping the less powerful in regard to Kootenai County issues. To align himself with Charlie Nipp in his methods is sad. I would have hoped that Mr. Reed would have stepped forward to demand full disclosure from the LCDC Board members. I would have hoped that his often appreciated activist style would have been used to ward off the problem of LCDC and the City Council not expecting full public disclosure. If Mr. Reed happens to read this I would ask him to objectively watch the actions of Mr. Nipp going forward.
Comment by citizen — March 14, 2009 @ 2:59 pm
Mary, you didn’t give me the wrong impression. But I believe we must be careful to use the correct nomenclature on subjects such as this.
I have been tackling that ubiquitous “to do” list that we all have. Takes lots of elbow grease, but not much thought. So I have been mulling this subject over from different angles. As I see it; Nipp handles large amounts of tax dollars. Why doesn’t he understand that those who part with those dollars have every right to accounting. Not just the money, but the behavior of those using said money. Also, Nipp doesn’t seem to have much of a grasp of the language. And very little common sense. I do believe that hubris (ah there is that great word) and a lack of self control dictated his actions. One can picture an apopletic explosion followed by how dare anyone question me. These people seem to have an indescribably bloated sense of self entitlement. Fortunately this is not Tudor England, or all who question would end up close and personal with the axe.
Charlie, it doesn’t take membership in Mensa to figure that what you should have done was to welcome any and all inquiries regarding your actions. ie: “To the best of my knowledge, I have done nothing wrong. However if there is any question, I welcome clarification”. If you can’t figure this out for yourself Charlie, I suggest you stop listening to the sycophants and hire someone who will give you beneficial advice. Blowing your royal stack was a really bad idea!
Comment by Faringdon — March 14, 2009 @ 3:07 pm
Apparently St. Charlie the Nipp really is as dumb as dirt.– Faringdon
name calling? sad.
Comment by reagan — March 14, 2009 @ 5:00 pm
Did not mean to not capitalize Jorgenson’s name – I was in a hurry.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 14, 2009 @ 5:17 pm
Yep – after some thought. Nipp might not be too bright to pursue a “SLAPP” suit because some folks particpated in local governnment, but this is Idaho. Ugly.
Comment by Stebbijo — March 14, 2009 @ 7:06 pm