The long-awaited Decaria report will be delayed again, according to this morning's Standard-Examiner story.
"It's not done, which is unfortunate, County Attorney Decaria told Ace Reporter Schwebke yesterday. Mr. Decaria expects to release this report NEXT Monday -- the day before the election -- today's headline story reports. Unfortunate indeed, we say -- disastrous might be a better description. Mr. Decaria, (himself a candidate (unopposed for re-election on the Democratic ticket,) presently finds himself in a real political tight spot, we think. At this stage of the game his position is lose-lose, if he releases his report on the eve of an important State Senate election.
If his report exonerates Jon Greiner, he'll be accused of playing politics, and helping out his law enforcement colleague, a Republican. If the report slams Greiner, Mr. Decaria will be accused of dropping a political grenade to help out his cronies in the Democratic party.
The public's right to know bumps headlong into the public's equally-important right to a fair election in this instance, we think. Whatever conclusions are contained in the report, the public will have little time to rationally digest them, if released next Monday, and neither political party with horses in the Senate 18 race will have fair opportunity to respond with their own interpretations prior to the election. Whatever the conclusions, Mr. Decaria's report could be political dynamite, subject to pre-election "spinning" by folks with less-than-noble motives.
The best strategy for Mr. Decaria at this juncture, we think, is to withhold his findings until after the election. The public has waited for a couple of months now, and the public can wait another couple of days.
We'd feel differently if Mr. Decaria were releasing a binding judicial decision based upon the adversarial input of all the parties involved in this unfortunate mess. Mr. Decaria's opinion in this instance however, will be one man's opinion only, and will not be legally-binding on anyone.
Regardless of the nature of the findings in Mr. Decaria's report, we believe Mr. Decaria should exercise sound prosecutorial discretion, and release his report in a manner best calculated to cause the least confusion and disruption of the election process.
That means AFTER the election, gentle readers.
That's out position and we're sticking to it.
And what say our gentle readers about this?
(We'll post a link to the Std-Ex story as soon as it's available on the web, by the way. At the moment, the Std-Ex storage site seems to be experiencing technical problems.)
Congrats to the Std-Ex for this, BTW. It couldn't have happened to a nicer newspaper. And we at Weber County Forum would like to think we play our own small part in helping boost Standard-Examiner circulation. Focusing daily as we do, on the stories that appear on the Std-Ex print edition pages, we believe we enhance the Std-Ex's relevance in our community. Notwithstanding the frequent "digs" that appear on our electronic pages, we don't know what we'd do without the Std-Ex. We get the feeling sometimes that they look at us as news-vampires. We view the relationship as symbiotic and mutually beneficial, however.
Don't let the cat get your tongues this morning, folks.
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
19 comments:
Sorry, Rudi, but on this one, we disagree. Your position makes sense if and only if you believe that the report, which Mr. DeCaria expected to release yesterday as late as last Friday, couldn't possibly be done before next Monday. I don't believe that. If the report was all but done last Friday, I just don't buy the notion that suddenly, over the weekend, Mr. DeCaria realized that he had a weeks more work to do.
If anyone wants examples of why there is so much cynicism and distrust of government in general, Mr. DeCaria has just provided us, sadly, with another very good one.
We don't need a county attorney who can't make a tough decision.
There is a word for people like this but I don't remember how to spell it. Besides this Blog has rules.
I sent an email to John Mayer, the City Planner whose listed duty is "Planning Commission" on the City website, expressing my concerns about relaxing requirements on building in sensitive areas. Not only could the area be prone to landslides, but I have been told that the Wasatch Fault runs along the base of the mountains and that the potential for damaging earthquakes is a consideration as well. [The photo at the top of page 8 of the brochure is particularly interesting.]
Mr. Mayer replied that the City Council is the body responsible for making these decisions and suggested I contact them. Mr. Mayer did agree to pass my email along to the other Planning Commission members for me.
I'm not quite sure how to take his reply. On one hand, my concerns will be communicated to the rest of the PC, but I also feel that the buck was passed. The City Council gets input and recommendations from the Planning Council, after all.
One thing I believe we can agree about, Curnudgeon...
This situation stinks.
The problem could have easily been prevented at the outset, if Decaria had simply recognized the potential conflicts early on, declined the assignment, and urged shipping the investigation to ANOTHER JURISDICTION where the obvious inherent conflicts did not exist.
Several of our gentle readers urged this solution, BTW; but the conflicted "powers that be" arrogantly failed to listen.
And you're right. The perception of unreasonable delay really leaves a foul smell about the body politic. It truly stinks up the joint.
The important feature in this matter we think however, is that whatever is contained in this upcoming report will be merely ONE LAWYER'S OPINION.
Mr. Decaria's opinion will actually bear very slight weight legally. In truth, it would be no more important in a court of law than ANY OTHER LAWYER'S OPINION.
We strongly believe that the late issuance of this report will deprive the public (and candidates)of adaquate notice & opportunity to be heard in this matter; and that the danger of disruption of an orderly election process far outweighs the public's right to know about a relatively insignificant piece of evidentiary material.
AND NO, Sharon!
Rudi was not dumb enough to lay money on the promised timely release of Mr. Decaria's opinion letter, heheh.
Just a thought....wouldn't Mayor Garwood be as suseptible to the Hatch Act, maybe even moreso, than Chief Greiner?
Rudi
Your incessant need to protect Greiner is really chipping away at your credibility and that of this blog.
For the WCF to come out and pander to this injustice that is being perpitrated on the citizens of Ogden is as outrageous as the crime itself.
Have you no sense of honor or decency?
Is your Republican partisanship more important to you than the integrity of the WCF?
JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED.
For you to suggest that this much delayed report be released after the election is playing right into the corruptness at city hall. That has been their plan all along and now comes the pretender to the voice of truth promoting the same perfidity!
Shame on you Rudi, you are nothing more than a phone NeoCon whore!
Ozboy:
Your recent flirtation with the evil neoCON right-wing sociialist Godfrey shill Stuart Reid has been duly noted.
Ozboy,
I didn't know the WCF had any integrity to begin with. [on godfrey basher]Besides Godfrey has all the integrity so there probably isn't any left for the WCF anyway.[off godfrey basher]
rudi,
My big question about the investigation is why has it taken nearly 3 months? At this point it would not really make any difference had it been farmed out to someone where an 'obvious inherent conflict[s] did not exist'. No matter who was doing the investigation, at this point it will have an unfair effect on the election. But again WHY has it taken so long? Is that a reflection on the competence and quality of the lawyers and investigators currently employed in the county attorneys office? If so that would seem to be more of a negative for Decaria than anyone.
And as for it being 'merely ONE LAWYER'S OPINION', while that may be true, that ONE LAWYER is the one that decided if there were crimes committed that warrant prosecution. If he determined the law was violated in a manner sufficent to charge someone with a crime, then in the end, his opinion is really the only one that counts. You are correct that at trail in a judical court his opinion would not be worth any more than any other attorney, his opinion is the one that determines if it ever sees a court.
OGDENLOVER,
I can understand you confusion/disappointment. I haven't looked to see if the meeting rudi referenced is a public hearing, but if it is then you should definately go and express your opinion. The final decision is up to the council but the planning commissions recommendation will carry significant weight. And they are the ones that actually draft the actual ordinances that the council will consider for approval. So they do have a pretty big say in things and your opinion should be considered in their work on the issue.
Don't let some bureacrat get you down.
Well, kids...did we not predict this sorry mess?
The CC failed in its duty to appoint outside counsel to 'look into' the Godfrey/Greiner misdeeds, and the egregious trampling on Officer Jones' rights.
The CC sat dumbly while Godfrey brot in his sandbox playmate to see if there were any misdeeds.
Firstly...it's the Councils' job to seek the investigative agency.
Secondly, DiCaria should have taken some of the mayor's high integrity and refused to be involved.
Thirdly, This council shoulda censured Godfrey for overstepping his bounds, AGAIN!
I have a sick feeling that Jones will be fired. I hope he has a first=rate att'y who will turn around and sue the city for MILLIONS! If Godfrey's and Greiner's hubris weren't higher than their integrity.....none of this would have happened. But, sadly, two egos are on a course destined to end up in the courts.
All this while, Jones has been denied his second income......justice delayed IS justice denied.....correct Ozboy.
But when Jones does get his justice....he'll have money in the bank!
Hopefully you are right Sharon.
Unfortunately the money that will end up in Matt Jones' bank account will be out of the pockets of the Ogden tax payers, not from those guilty bastards that caused the damage to begin with.
FREE MATT JONES!
Sharon:
Just a caution: we do not yet know what the allegations against officer Jones are or whether they are credible or not. It would be as unwise to assume, on the basis of little or no evidence, that the allegations against him, whatever they are, are bogus, as it would be to assume, on little or no evidence, that they are substantive. Annoying though it is, we're going to have to wait for facts to come out before we can draw any sound conclusions about his conduct.
About Chief Greiner and the Mayor and now, sadly, Mr. Decaria, we already have information on which to base some conclusions about their conduct in this matter. And the conclusions are not pretty. But about Officer Jones' conduct in re: the allegations [whatever they may be] against him, we know virtually nothing. Patience. There really is no other option.
I believe that today is the day that Greiner is supposed to decide, per the federal directive, whether he is going to resign as Chief or withdraw from the senatorial campaign.
Maybe we won't find out about that, either. That would be really strange.
I think it has been fairly clearly stated that Greiner's lawyer is basically filing an appeal to the Office of Special Counsel and is not going to resign from either his job or the race. I haven't heard if he has started campaigning again. Reid has since he recieved a Greiner flier.
So I won't find it strange that Greiner doesn't do either but I will find it strange if he continues to say he is not campaigning.
butch said: Just a thought....wouldn't Mayor Garwood be as suseptible to the Hatch Act, maybe even moreso, than Chief Greiner?
I would not think that Garwood would be suseptible to the Hatch Act as a part of his job as an hearing officer for the drivers license division because he probably has no oversight of money from grants or is reponsible for applying for them or administering them. His position as mayor would be more problematic eg. Community Devopment Block Grants and other things that cities can get from the feds. But I also don't believe that his position as mayor would fall under the jurisdiction of the Hatch Act.
Well here is what the Trib had to say about Greiner.
Ogden Police Chief Jon Greiner is resuming his campaign for a state Senate seat today after a 10-day suspension. He had stopped actively campaigning after receiving a letter from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which contended that his campaign violates the federal Hatch Act.
In a letter sent today to that agency, Greiner's attorney argues that the Hatch Act does not apply to the police chief.
The act is designed to prevent federal employees and those state and local government executives whose agencies receive federal money from dolling out cash for political favors.
But Attorney Jim Bradshaw said the police chief has little to do with how his department spends the scant federal money it receives. In the letter, the lawyer asks the Office of Special Counsel to reconsider.
The chief says he decided, on the strength of Bradshaw's advice, to resume campaigning. The election is one week away.
If the Office of Special Counsel were to prosecute Greiner after the election and prevail - whether or not he is elected - he could be required to quit his job as police chief or the city could be required to pass up two years worth of his salary.
However, if elected, he could not be forced from office.
Greiner is the Republican candidate for the Senate seat in District 18. Stuart Reid is the Democratic candidate.
I thought the bolded part was especially interesting. And how did this slip past the SE? I guess Greiner must not be talking to them.
Arcritic....What am I missing?
You quote the Trib as saying "whether or not he is elected...he could be required to quit his job.....".and the the next sentence says: "However, if elected, he could not be forced from office."
I guess I had always been under the impression that even if he was elected that he would not be able to serve, but it seems that he can be elected and serve and if the OSC decides to pursue charges that him taking the elected position would only be an aggravating factor. So the fact that if it is anything like any other court type proceeding it could take months to get before the authority that has jurisdiction. Then if he loses the case, the city either fires him or pays the fine but he gets to keep the seat. If he wins the case, he simply keeps his seat and his job.
If he refuses to accept the seat even if he is elected then, according to the letter, that would be a mitigating factor in situation. I wonder, if he either loses or refuses the seat if elected, would they even pursue the case?
Sorry, I meant to add. Based on the fact he believes he can continue campaigning for the position, it would be hard to imagine him not taking the seat if elected. So it seems he will probably be the next senator.
Arcritic:
Ah, politics. Satire and Irony are dead. This morning's SE has an article in which Grenier's spokesman claims the Bush Justice Department, run by AG and Bush appointee Alberto Gonzales, is part of a Democratic plot to prevent the voters of Ogden from electing Republican Grenier.
Jon Stewart, Colbert and Saturday Night Live could not possibly do better.
[The only way to read Grenier's spokesman's statements in the SE so that they do not mean the above, is to read them as saying Democrats are involved in a reprehensible underhanded plot to force the Ogden Chief of Police to obey the law. And Jon Stewart, Colbert and SNL couldn't improve on that version either....]
New comments are not allowed.