Open Mike for Idaho Falls City Workers February 2007
Have something to say? ADD A NEW POST!
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to the newsletter or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
We republish this open forum for Idaho Falls city workers on the first day of each month. The July article for city workers was one of our most commented-on articles ever.
This monthly open forum is a vehicle for city workers (or anyone with knowledge of inner city workings) to discuss what they think is going good and going wrong for our Idaho Falls government.
City workers are invited to give kudos to people who may be overlooked by their bosses. I hope these comments appear often. Upcoming city news and announcements are also welcome here. Last month we heard of a proposed new police and fire station that may go to bond this fall on donated Ball Ventures land south of Pancheri. Any updates to that?
City workers are also invited to alert everyone of potential problems brewing in our municipality. They can anonymously report misdeeds, fraud, or abuse. Our local mass media read the articles and comments on IdahoFallz.com often, and they look into all allegations. Tips left here will produce follow ups.
So how do you think our local government is running?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Vote:
0 
0 Pretty difficult to comment on something that you say you saw. All we have is your word not specifics and you want us to comment on a prosecutor not doing his job according to Inside Observer? Hmmmm. Guess we will have to rely on your expert status as a legal watchdog as you seem to love to comment on this stuff.
If that’s the case then I can come up with some good ones for you to comment on. How about the numerous teachers who are horrible at their jobs that teach little, that the students hate because all they do is read magazines while the students read out of the text materials. How about them? I had many like this; should teachers like this be allowed to teach while there is imperical evidence that they lie on a daily basis by claiming they are teaching? Mind you this is just my opinion on my observations but I want you to comment on them. Please, go back to grinding your axe and come to us with something of substance instead of your lame suppositions.
Vote:
0 0 flyonthewall: those are valid concerns, however this is a discussion thread dedicated to city affairs. If we already don’t have a suitable discussion thread for education, perhaps we should start one?
Inside Observer: that is a disappointing scenario you present, but like flyonthewall said, we really need to know the specific case and people involved to do anything about it.
If the specific case and people cannot be identified, we’ll have to let it be a philosophical discussion rather than action-oriented (not that philosophical is bad, there’s plenty of it on IFz).
And the same goes for flyonthewall’s assertions about bad teachers; if specific problem teachers cannot be identified, then it will also have to remain a philosophical discussion.
Any other city (or even county) government issues that should be brought up?
Any good things our city or county government is doing that hasn’t been acknowledged?
Vote:
0 0 Flyonthewall,
What kind of specifics are you looking for?
1) An officer violated someone’s civil rights.
2) Another officer wrote a police report detailing the events leading up to a man’s arrest.
3) The second officer testified “under oath” to details that absolutely contradicted his police report. In his report he clearly states that he was not present (or even in the vicinity). In his testimony, he claims to have been present for the entire sequence of events. (This was contradicted by the third officer’s police report, who WAS present the entire time but was not called to testify - surprise!)
4) If the second officer testified to the facts as they appeared in the police reports, the case would have been dismissed. The facts in the police reports coincide - the testimony does not.
5) The judge and prosecutor were both fully aware, via cross-examination and the existence of the police reports, that the second officer changed his story, but since the written report is not admissable evidence, only the testimony given “under oath”, the judge ruled against the defendant, claiming “(I) have no reason to disbelieve the officer’s testimony.” (Really????)
6) I admit to only presuming no action is being taken against the officer because it would cause this case to fold as well as others where the officer’s testimony was critical to the outcome.
If you prefer to consider this hypothetical, rather than factual, I have no beef with that. But rather than calling my comments “lame”, why don’t you just answer the question? Hypothetically speaking, of course!
Joe, I respectfully disagree with your assertion that flyonthewall’s questions regarding teachers are not a “city” issue. I think it is vital to the city for many reasons. We have large businesses unwilling to move here since we don’t have what they believe to be a quality education system. We have children moving through the education system here who will be voters and leaders in the years to come who may not be getting a proper education that will assist them in being the leaders and citizens we would hope them to be. Many education officials are elected and their positions/actions are relevant to discussions. But I thank you for asking flyonthewall to provide a thread for that discussion, or at the very least, not to intermix his attack of my post with his attack against the education system. Having had a few blowouts with teachers over the years on those very issues, I can sympathize with flyonthewall’s feelings. Vice-principals, principals, and superintendants alike will just blow you off if you attempt to do anything about a teacher falling short of the mark. Would this be because of the union, or is it laziness, or what? You are correct in that without details from flyonthewall, we have no way of knowing whether his comments need to be in their own thread or in this one. Did he try and take some sort of action? What happened? He may be like me and unable to provide more info without surrendering his anonymity - or worse, having his children subject to retaliation (been there, done that!). Can he at least give us elementary school, junior high or high school? District? I actually participated in a grass-roots group who banded together to get rid of a teacher at Eagle Rock. She was not fired, but she was moved to another area where I believe she does better work. It was not without consequence to our children, however. Although our children were not subjected to her any longer, there were other teachers whose attitudes changed dramatically toward every one of the children whose parents participated.
As for being willing to “do anything about it” - do you really think you can? Until it’s our own rights being violated (either in the justice or education system), we have very little to say when our rights are being flushed. Think Patriot Act here. We’re losing our rights front and back but we’re painfully powerless to do anything about it. My only hope was that on a more local level where we would like to think we can assert a little more control than we can over the events in D.C., we would rise up and say “no more”. As for specifics on the case, I would need to ask permission from the parties involved before disclosing that in this forum as I would assume so would flyonthewall.
Flyonthewall, two last questions, since you seem to be an advocate of all the people employed in the justice system.
1) When was the last time you heard of a case being dismissed over civil rights violations? (With specifics please, such as judge, prosecutor, case scenario, etc.)
2) Do you believe that when ALL our local officers testify, they “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”?
I would close with this comment. I don’t think all officers are bad, but I believe there are some who are. I also don’t think all teachers are bad, but I believe there are some who are. In both cases, the bad ones overshadow the good ones. Can we really do anything besides complain here? I would be open to anyone’s suggestions on either issue on how to actually “do something” to resolve these problems. As you may recall, several months ago, I posted a time and place regarding an upcoming legal case where testimony that would curl your hair was going to be given regarding a senior officer’s appallingly bad behavior. Not a single person appeared. Please tell me why I should provide more details on other cases, if no real effort is going to be made “to do anything about it.” Again I ask, can we really “do anything about it”?
Vote:
0 0 Inside,
There are advocates for civil rights violations such as the ACLU. Perhaps the defendants lawyer would get a hold of them if the facts are as conclusive as you say they are. Where a police report is not admissable it is there in writing for all to see and is not going anywhere right? Transcripts of the proceeding where you alledge the violations of someone’s civil rights are also attainable. So my qestions? If things are as black and white as you say then it’s quite easy to compare testimony, to police report that would shine a spotlight on these lies bright enough that no cockroach could possibly hide from.
So if all is as you say it is all we need to do is get case number for police report. Dockett number for the case involved and forward such information to the AG’s office and again if this is so blatant then the defendant’s attorney must be in contact with the ACLU for help to fight this horrible injustice.
Vote:
0 0 Flyonthewall,
The AG’s office cannot initiate an investigation without an invitation from the local prosecutor. Do you really think an invitation of that sort would be forthcoming?
The ACLU rarely involves itself unless there is more than one incident involving the same officer(s). The defense attorney would have no way of knowing, with the exception of gossip, how many incidents this officer had been involved in unless it was with his own clients. He cannot properly approach someone else’s client without breaching his ethics. By the way, the gossip is that this officer is well-known for playing fast and loose with the truth, dependent on the circumstances. He apparently only tells the truth when it serves his purpose. That would be one reason why I don’t name him. I only have the facts in this case, not in the ones I hear gossip about. I will not repeat gossip about someone that includes their names. And after reading through the various threads and posts, I am not the only one who believes that some officers aren’t always honest. It’s been stated before by others and I am happy to second that. The incident with Larry Lyon and Frei would be one of them. If memory serves me correctly, Frei denied he said what the video proved later that he did say. Just an example.
Vote:
0 0 Not being an attorney, I am not sure about this, but don’t the Feds prosecute for civil rights violations since it is a federal statute? If the allegations are true then the feds would be interested. Also, if local prosecutor has to request an AG investigation, how did the AG get involved with Kimball Mason? Did he request an investigation of himself? I think there must be other options for an open/shut case you are implying.
Vote:
0 0 Can anyone give a good reason why the police department would find it necessary to buy a Chevy Avalanche and a Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo for two of its officers? They could have bought four equally serviceable vehicles for what it cost to buy these two high end vehicles. Seems like a waste of money to me.
Vote:
0 0 Hadn’t heard of these purchases.
These things usually are not as costly as they first seem. Dealers sometimes give deep discounts (the DARE corvette was completely donated I think), and it really depends on what the intended task is and that vehicles efficiency and reliability ratings. Buying cheaper vehicles may be pennywise and pound foolish.
However, I admit I don’t know about these two specific purchases. Anyone else got information? What officers? What is the intended use? What cost were the vehicles to our city?
Vote:
0 0 If those “high end” vehicles are purchased used they are fairly cheap as neither hold resale value very well. Not that most people consider $30k high end. police do have use for unmarked cars and i think they need to buy more. But from me next time.
Vote:
0 0 Lying is legal unless in court under oath, correct? Police officers are trained to lie during interrogations and questioning. This is done to find out the truth. Lying to catch the bad guys is one way they do their job.
But just try lying to them!
For law enforcement, lying is routine, normal, and accepted. Ask Kimball Mason if it is not second nature.
I had an IFPD Captain, now retired I believe, look me square in the eye and lie to me when I was 100% sure of the truth. When I questioned him on it, he added more lies (also known to be 100% false) to prove his point.
It used to be that being a cop was an honorable profession. As a child I looked up to, and admired them. Throughout history the bad guys have always been bad guys. But now our law enforcement nationwide has become untrustworthy in my view.
I do not know which ones are in the majority of good cops, or in the minority of bad cops. But now, sad to say, I have begun to assume the worst in any dealings with them. I wonder where I got my bad attitude.
Vote:
0 0 Inside just a quick point… I have done some research and police reports are allowed in court routinely so if a cop was on the stand lying and the defense attorney allowed this to happen..well then your looking at bad representation as the attorney would have looked at all relevant documents in preparing for the defense of his client. So I find it hard to believe that any cop would know that his police report said one thing and then go on the stand and completely say something different knowing the defense attorney would ambush him with the report.
Sorry your ‘years’ observing our judicial system show that you are just an observer and are not trained in the area of the law.
Vote:
0 0 Inside also another quick point that really shows where your knowledge base is at on this subject.
As shannahleeb correctly points out local prosecutors do not need to be the ones that invite the State AG’s office to investigate. Corruption cases routinely involve complaints for ordinary citizens that feel they have been wronged and if there is compelling evidence the AG’s office can get involved with or without some local’s blessing.
Case in point if your feel you have been defrauded by somebody living in another State you do what?????? Inside with your legal expertise tell us what you do???? Thinking yet??? Have you the answer????
Why yes!!!! You have it!!!! You have the answer right??? YOU CALL THAT STATES AG OFFICE AND FILE A COMPLAINT. Yes anyone can do this and the AG’s office of that state does a little thing called an INVESTIGATION. Yes they do this if your complaint has substance to it.
Anyway Inside thanks for the input and your attempt to slime officers and the system are as transparent as your intentions, to bad you have impuned your own point so badly that it and any future posts you decide to post will be called into question and highly scrutinized. BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ time ran out thank you for playing INSIDE better luck next time.
Vote:
0 0 Our local Post Register had a great front page article that extensively addressed the city’s grievance process.
I had never heard before that one had to file the grievance with one’s own supervisor. The sooner Mayor Fuhriman changes that, the better. Even if it seems to be the norm of many Idaho cities, it seems wrong.
I liked the article mostly because they published facts: 36 grievances in 17 years. You hear all these anecdotal stories, and they certainly sound compelling. However the facts show that few grievances are actually filed.
Do you think grievances are few and far between because employees had to file it with their supervisors, or because few city employees actually have complaints against their leadership?
I think we will know better in the months and years after the proposed changes are made in who you file with.
There was that one engineer (I used to have a link to his website where he described the whole ordeal) that ended up winning $300k from our city in a lawsuit. His grievance was also denied at the city level, but he got justice in a neutral jurisdiction.
What might happen if more of those employees had access to outside legal resources?
It was telling that city council members are brought in for the grievance hearing, and yet Larry Lyon never has. Either he hasn’t been invited or he had conflicts at those times he was invited?
Vote:
0 0 I had never heard before that one had to file the grievance with one’s own supervisor.
That’s been fairly common at private employers (and the military) where I’ve worked. As an officer/manager, I’ve gotten a small number of grievances from my direct reports. Most I denied and invited an appeal. A couple I ended up agreeing with the person and corrected my initial decision. Granted, if it got to the point where I fired someone, there’s not a huge chance that I’d change my mind, but in my opinion, the supervisor is usually the person to complain to as a first step. For one thing, it ensures that the supervisor actually knows there’s a problem. I think it works best to have HR or someone else involved to help prepare the documentation and present it in an objective manner, if possible.
It was telling that city council members are brought in for the grievance hearing, and yet Larry Lyon never has. Either he hasn’t been invited or he had conflicts at those times he was invited?
Don’t know about all of them, but in at least four recent cases that I can think of Larry’s had a conflict, either because of his Council responsibilities or his advocacy. Since the objective in a grievance procedure is to be as neutral as possible toward both the employee and the city, I don’t find it surprising or conspiratorial that he hasn’t been appointed.
FWIW, based on the PR story, there have been eight grievances filed since Larry was elected. During that period, Ida Hardcastle and Joe Groberg haven’t been appointed to hear a grievance either. Bill Shurtleff sat on 3 of them.
Vote:
0 0 Great breakdown John. I thought the article was good and your breakdown is concise for those that do not subscribe to the PR.
Vote:
0 0 I am not sure under what circumstances the AG can initiate an investigation but I personally contacted them regarding Kimball Mason’s misbehaviour and they informed me that they could not intervene unless invited to do so by Dane Watkins. We provided the AG with details about Kimball’s actions but that wasn’t enough to prompt action (although they might have filed away this data for future reference).
Vote:
0 0 John,
I understand you contacted the AG’s office directly. My thought is that they can’t or won’t get involved in something like this at the drop of hat, so your comment that they may have filed it away for future reference is probably on the money based on what info they already had.
I guess if I had been the one that had contacted them in regards to this case like you did and if I got the response you did, I guess my next question for them would have been: “what if Dane’s office is somehow tied into this how can I be sure as a citizen that you will look into this?” Corruption cases usually have tentacles so i’m not buying their response as the final word probably because they had already been in contact with Dane’s office and were awaiting him to tie up his loose ends before involving them.
John when did you go to the AG’s office with your request?
I would be interested to see what the timing was in relation to the events we now know took place.
Vote:
0 0 I think these opposing claims are very interesting.
We have different people saying the AG’s office must be invited to investigate by an official entity, that the AG’s office can be invited to investigate by anyone, or that they can investigate anything they get a whiff of that intrigues them.
I suspect it will end up a little of all three; that they have rules and criteria for when they have to be invited and who can invite them to investigate.
This issue should be clarified by an email to the AG’s office, so an official response can be posted here for us all to understand better.
We still do not know the specific case involved that got this discussion started.
I have to admit it sounds illogical that a police officer could testify the opposite of what’s in his/her police report and the defense attorney would not raise the issue.
If we had the specific case, one could check the publicly available police report and sworn testimony for serious inconsistencies, right?
Vote:
0 0 Joe,
My thoughts exactly it does not square with logic. I know if I’m a cop no way would I knowingly testify or lie if my report said something else. I guess you could if you wanted to make a case that you were wrong on your report but that’s another question and not what Inside was saying.
Vote:
0 0 Corey Taule did an excellent article in the Post Register today, 02/11/07 on the city grievance policy. If as a city employee you see something wrong going on should you risk your job bringing it to light? Not if you want to keep that good job! Larry Lyon has been working to address the grievance process for some time now, and I hope that since the PR article something is done. When you work in an environment of fear of retaliation you end up with people like Kimball Mason going unchecked for years!
Vote:
0 0 I agree Corey Taule did an excellent job with the article. Has anyone else noticed the PR seems to have changed assignments of 3 different reporters?
Corey use to be in Boise this time every year telling us what local Reps and Senators were and were not doing. This year, it is Phil Davidson, who use to write the Cops and Courts beat, reporting from Boise.
Additionally, Nick Draper has been the 3rd person to make a change in writing. While I believe his new beat is the Cops and Courts, I can’t help but wonder what else the Post Register staff knows (or is pursuing) and decided to use a more senior reporter in Corey Taule to report it?
Publisher, Roger Plothow, hinted months ago that more stories regarding city business would be published, but they would take time.
I realize there could be other reasons changes in assignments could have been made. But, the article yesterday, from my persepctive, took someone who has had years of experience writing about deicate issues and lots of contacts to confirm what was written.
I might be totally wrong in my theory. What do you think?
Vote:
0 0 If it is brand new then we could say that it is a waste of money for that they could four cars with the amount of the Jeep. But maybe it is just a used car owned by someone and was sold to them with a cheaper price.
Leave Your Comment
Our Community's Comment Guidelines:- Please stay polite and on topic.
- Your email will never be published.
- No profanity or euphemisms for profanity.
- No personal attacks, name-calls, put-downs, or baiting other guests, races, genders, or religions.
- Express opinions, facts, logic, and reasoning; just don’t argue for argument’s sake.
- No commercial links (unless absolutely relevant to the discussion) and no religious proselytizing.
- No religious discussions (for or against). Go to http://religion.idahofallstoday.com for religious discussions.
- Use the "I" word as much as possible to demonstrate responsibility.
- Limit yourself to using one name per thread to demonstrate responsibility.
- If you think a comment is inappropriate, ask Joe to review it.
whew, slow day, time to all start commenting again!
Loading ...
Vote:
In my opinion, it’s business as usual. A police officer, a lieutenant, got on the stand at a court hearing this last week, and testified to things that totally and completely contradicted his written police report. (I watched him read the report several times before he testified so it isn’t as if he didn’t remember what he had said and done) If he had not changed his story, the criminal case would have been dismissed. So, he perjured himself and then the judge stated that he had no reason to disbelieve the officer even though he had the written police report in his hands. The defendant’s testimony has been consistent from the beginning, but the officer keeps changing his story so the case won’t get dismissed because they didn’t do their jobs properly.
I have to ask. Do our fair readers (and our local justice system workers) believe it’s okay to perjure yourself so a criminal won’t go free because a police officer didn’t do his job correctly? In this case, this officer has been around long enough to know how to do his job the right way.
There are times we have all seen some goofball get off on a technicality, but those “technicalities” are our civil rights. At what point are we willing to draw the line and say if we must let someone off because a police officer violated a man’s civil rights, then so be it? Maybe they won’t make the same mistake the next time. (Maybe next time, it will be you or me who is in their clutches).
And finally, how do you feel about a prosecutor who doesn’t take action against a law enforcement officer who commits perjury? If it was a citizen, I believe we would be charged.
Thoughts?