propaganda and lies

Last week, I got a little bit of paperwork in the mail from Gary U. Scharff’s Portland-based law firm.  Gary is OSB #883031.

Bankruptcy sure is expensive (see Gary’s rate sheet attached to the second document posted below). It must be worth it, he was able to get Kameron DeLashmutt and his resort out from under the debt amassed. The failure of Thornburg (and the many other undersold destination resorts which are facing similar dilemmas) was precipitated by the economic downturn. As demand for lavish desert resorts dried up, so did available investment money.

It certainly didn’t help Thornburg Resort Company, LLC when the self-styled environmentalist-types started suing to stop development. These folks started their legal battle at the height of the economic boom. You know, the boom that flowed money from the Federal Reserve like Niagara Falls. Money went everywhere, so people took advantage of the torrential downpour to start several developments like Thornburg throughout the Pacific Northwest. Despite the money that might have been available, legal maneuvers successfully stopped development at Thornburg up to the bankruptcy you see now.

Here is Thornburg Resort Company, LLC’s announcement:

1. Notice of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Case, Meeting of Creditors, and Deadlines
2. AMENDED APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT OF ATTORNEY UNDER 11 U.S.C. SECTION 327(a), RULE 2014 VERIFIED STATEMENT FOR PROPOSED PROFESSIONAL, SCHEDULE 21, SCHEDULE 22, and CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (listing all the creditors)

It’s done – the likes of Mary Anderson and Jody Vaughan are removed from their perch of power at Deschutes County.  The county commissioners were smart enough to not bind the county into a union contract with these fascists.  (The full list of those eligible for the soup kitchen includes Darryl Nakahira, Phil Duong, Mary Anderson, Jody Vaughan and Brentley Foster)

As reported in the Bulletin, Andrew Altschul, attorney for Foster and Vaughan, says “I think (Flaherty) targeted people who he knew supported the union,” and “I think it’s union-busting.”  Andrew Altschul obviously has a hard time thinking.  Think about this, Andrew: You are sitting in court, explaining to a judge that your client is has a claim against Deschutes County for unfair termination with an eye towards union-busting.  Clearly the county didn’t want a union, and to discourage the union effort, they fired your clients.  Following your presentation, the opposing attorney presents his case.  He (or she?) says that the county didn’t fire these employees due to their union formation.  In fact, the laywer that opposes you argues that Patrick Flaherty had announced his plans well ahead of the formation of the union.  Your opposition continues to argue that the union was explicitly formed to get a “just cause” termination clause in the union contract with the county, and that the key organizers of the union were people who knew that their fascist “prosecutorial philosophy” was not going to keep them in a job past the new year.

That paints an entirely different picture.  With Altschul’s current claims, the underlying legal question to prove union-busting intent becomes a question of timing. Were the union organizers targeted for firing before, or after the formation of the union?  Did they know about Flaherty’s plans before the union, prompting their formation of it, or was their blissful union suddenly broken up by Flaherty’s vengeful, union-busting antics?  It’s going to be an uphill battle to argue that Deschutes County was aiming for the DCDDAA union itself.  Why did Jody Vaughan and Mary Anderson jump into this union so quickly and vocally?  I’ll tell you why.  The people who headed up the union are the same ones who knew they were losing their jobs the minute the words “prosecutorial philosophy” were spoken.  The philosophy of the likes of Mary Anderson and Jody Vaughan is to “pursue with zeal any case that lands in my lap, to further my career no matter what merit it has, at the expense of the defendants and the county taxpayers.”  It is well known to anyone with a subscription to the Bend Bulletin that the union was formed to prevent the firing which happened today.  It will be fun to see how Andrew Altschul argues otherwise.  I’m taking bets on how long BAAS LLP can uselessly drain the coffers of these former Deschutes DDAs.  One year?  Two years?  Three years?  No matter how many years of legal expertise Altschul has, nothing he’s going to come up with will change the recorded, reported and well understood facts in this case.

There is talk of lawsuits being brought against former prosecutors in Deschutes County and prosecutors in Klamath County.   The target? Testing the limits of qualified immunity for prosecutors.  These former Deschutes DDAs have a lot more to worry about than using Altschul to steal more cash from the county they’ve already pillaged.  They may end up in the US Supreme Court, as center pieces for clarifying the current legal interpretation of qualified immunity developed in the Clinton era. When you abuse the public, knowingly and willingly, how much protection should the government provide?

Thomas Jefferson wrote, in a letter to William S. Smith on November 13th, 1787 that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time”:

God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. … And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

Of course, we aren’t talking about taking up arms, just separating a few certain folks from their jobs.

Dave Kanner called me at the start of business hours this morning returning my call.  As the Bulletin reports top and center on the front page this morning, two out of three county commissioners decided to abstain from signing the DCDDAA contract today.

Therefore I have to retract some of my previous comments; this government did in fact follow the will of the electorate.  Dave mentioned that the county does face some legal exposure by delaying; obviously this is not the same as the exposure they face from signing a contract protecting employees which Flaherty intends to disrupt.

Of the decision makers, who is most supportive of the DCDDAA? It appears to be County Commissioner Alan Unger and County Attorney Mark Pilliod.

The Bulletin reports that Unger moved to sign the union contract immediately.  Alan was quoted as saying that the county is “stuck between a rock and a hard spot.”  In essence, Alan wanted to put the county at further financial jeopardy yesterday.  Two more sensible commissioners struck him down.

Apparently, the (soon-to-be) fired DDAs are likely to counter with a suit claiming unfair termination for union involvement.  Yet, if the union contract was approved yesterday, the terminated DDAs would have much more solid ground to sue to the county.  It’s only logical that Commissioners Luke and Baney decided against this stupid course of action.  The Bulletin also quotes Unger as saying “I would rather see it on the bottom side of a half-million dollars than on the top side.”  Actions speak louder than words, and Unger clearly acted to make it on the top side of a half-million dollars (or more).  Unfortunately Alan Unger’s term does not expire on December 31st, 2010 like Baney and Luke’s do.  (Baney is re-elected for another 4 year term, and Luke is replaced by Tony DeBone, who will be an excellent commissioner.)

Mark Pilliod is reported by the Bulletin to have dismissed Flaherty’s accusation that imposing restrictions with the union contract would frustrate voters.  Yet letters like mine from last month (and the Bulletin’s from yesterday) clearly show this is not the case, these letters show that we are very frustrated by his interference to protect his buddies.

“They voted in favor of Patrick Flaherty and not in favor of Mike Dugan,” Pilliod said. “Did they say something else? Did they say, ‘We want the house to be cleaned?’ Are there members of the District Attorney’s Office that need to be terminated?”

Yes. Clean it up, guys.  What if people had confidence in our DA?  That would be a first.  Twenty three years is too long for anyone with this much power.  Put everyone in the DA’s office and the court system on notice that we expect them to act with the same level of honesty and integrity that these institutions imbue with their tall stone buildings and meticulously maintained walkways.  We pay for the buildings to have integrity, what about the people inside?

Was Thomas Jefferson suggesting in his 1787 letter that we re-form our government every 20 years?  That’s exactly what’s happening right now.  Patrick Flaherty knows that anyone, including himself, who stays in this position of power for over twenty years is not going to be serving the interests of justice, freedom and liberty.  Flaherty has been fighting these fascists as a defense lawyer.  He knows better than most about their unethical, immoral exercises of power.  If he could prove their intent, he could label some of their moves as illegal.  That’s a lot of work; as we see, just firing them has turned into a huge debacle.  He’s cleaning the house, please step out of his way.

Today’s Bend Bulletin carries an article about the current situation.  The DCDDAA contract is scheduled to be signed today by Deschutes County Commissioners.

Concurrently, the Bulletin published an article that bears an uncanny resemblance to what I wrote to both the Bulletin and to the Deschutes County Commissioners over a month ago.  Literally, “Allow Flaherty to do his job.”  This was released the same day the commissioners vote; much like my own letter, it is a strong message against the tying the hands of the new DA, a message against allowing Dugan’s DDAs to get special treatment.

Dave Kanner’s previous call to me was disingenuous.  He claimed, simply, that the county had to negotiate with the DCDDAA, or the county would lose out in the negotiation (by forcing it to arbitration.)  He implied that it had to be done now.  Not so fast.

Let’s review the logic here:

• First, it’s blatantly obvious that the only reason behind the formation of this union was to protect DDA jobs that are threatened by Flaherty’s course of action.
• Second, it’s clear the County has 150 days, according to Oregon state law, before the contract negotiations are pushed over to arbitration.

The DCDDAA was not formed 150 days ago.  It was formed in mid October.  One hundred and fifty days from mid-October, 2010? That puts the arbitration mark out to March, 2011.  That means the County Commissioners can wait until well after Flaherty has time to get rid of the fascists before putting a new contract in place.  As both the Bend Bulletin and myself suggest, the County Commissioners should wait.  That is, unless they want to simply override the will of the voters, destroy the cohesiveness within the new DA’s office, and cost the county hundreds of thousands of dollars (or more) in lawsuits from soon-to-be former DDAs.

So why are the current County Commissioners voting to cave to these fascists before Flaherty takes office? I left Dave Kanner a voice mail asking why.

He hasn’t called back yet.  But, I have a sneaking suspicion that the reason is simple, and like much else in politics and government, it follows the needs of the decision makers.  As my good friend pointed out to me regarding this latest incident, “Everybody has dirt on everybody.  I’m sure all kinds of threats have been quietly made.”

It’s certainly possible.  Do any commissioners, administrators or others in the county fear reprisal?  Are there threats of investigations and prosecutions if they don’t vote in favor of the DCDDAA? Or, perhaps something more subtle? I bet.

We’re all human.  We all make mistakes, no matter how minor or innocent.  Every person reading this blog entry, or the Bend Bulletin’s editorial page should be paying attention here.  All of you, every citizen of Deschutes County has some historical issue that the DA could pursue as a felony charge.  You don’t believe me?  What do you know about the law that these DDAs don’t know?  Did you dot every i and cross every t?  Just hope that you are never in the cross-hairs of some of these unethical, immoral fascists.  What other reason would the Commissioners have to go against the entire electorate, and even the Bulletin, prompting an article in the most prominent position of the editorial page?  What reason other than protecting themselves, and their friends? You be the judge.

When the voters can’t even get what they vote for, the problem becomes obvious.  This government is out of control.