Thanks for the emails and referrals. Last week the number of visitors went down, but the number of new visitors has gone up, and they are not stray visitors from South America looking for another Fortuna. If you wish to remain anonymous don't worry. Google analytics doesn't tell secrets, I still don't know who you are.
The data of what people click on shows a continuing interest in the lawsuit. I didn't quite understand that, until someone asked why the lawsuit is still on the Council Agenda. So here is the answer: there needs to be a settlement of attorney's fees. Last I heard my attorney was waiting to hear from the city's attorney. I hesitate to call again as every phone call adds to attorney's fees and therefore costs the city.
My concern is that although I have left 'lawsuit land' where you aren't allowed to talk except through your attorney, the City Council is probably still stuck there. Hope they find their way out soon.
As for using Vancil instead of building a new tank, my heartfelt thanks for this comment: "Godspeed on your stamina and ability to keep up all your good work even when it gets tiresome." I have taken some time off on this project except for some reviewing/reflection time. I don't imagine I'll have any news until the end of next week or so.
The two Fortuna (and nearby) Native Plant Society walks were well attended and enjoyable. Many thanks to Carol and Larry for coming down to lead the walks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
How much are these lawsuit fees?
ReplyDeleteI hope you get more than just the fees, as much as it sounds like the city jacked you around. I hope you get at least fifty thousand or more; that would make them think twice before withholding information!
I have gotten what I was asking for, the preliminary records. Actually, I thought twice before filing the lawsuit because I understand that when the city looses we, the tax payers, ultimately pay.
ReplyDeleteI did what I could to settle this quickly and avoid high costs. Now my attorney should to be paid for his work as provided for in the law. No records would have been released without his work.
Hopefully the thinking will change from "is releasing require?" to "is withholding required?"
Having just received our monthly water/sewer bill of $105 for a two person household I am thankful that our bill is so low compared to the recently closed Dennny's on River Walk Drive whose monthly bill was in excess of $2,000 per month. I really wonder what the City's take is per month on water and sewer.
ReplyDeleteSo exactly how much are these attorney's fees?
ReplyDeleteI cannot imagine they'd be much more than 500 dollars or so, I mean, how much time could your attorney have possibly put in on a public records act case? I'd hate to think that your attorney would be gouging the city with his/her fee, because as we all know, that is our money.
May 3 Anonymous--The 08-09 Fiscal Year Budget "Revenues & Other Sources of Funds"(page 10) lists Water Service Charges and Sewer Service Charges. The combined estimate for '07-'08 Service Charges was $4,879,000, or an average of $406,583 per month.
ReplyDeleteThe Budget is on line at friendlyfortuna.com, and it also contains information going back to 2004-05. There would also be information on expenditures. Also, I was looking for information on the amount of water billed and learned of the "Summary Water Usage Report" which contains usage and revenue by user type (residential, industrial, etc.) I was looking for annual numbers, if there are monthly reports I'm sure the City would let you take a look at them.
The water/sewer bills have gone up, especially the sewer it seems to me. Summertime is even worse; we stopped watering the lawn and still our summer bills were higher last year, although I guess not as high as if we had watered.
But some have to make choices which make our choice of not watering the lawn seem frivolous...
May 5 Anonymous-- My attorney's fees will be very little compared to what we paid staff to fritter away months denying me the records. And very little compared to the hours I spent trying to convince them that they were on a fool's errand blocking access to public records and then finding an attorney when my efforts failed.
ReplyDeleteIf I could have settled this for $500, believe me I would have. I think it is $350 to file the lawsuit. Please, be my guest, go on out and try to find an attorney to handle a Public Records Act case. Then ask them how long it will take and how much it will cast.
Or better yet, how about helping to pay for an accountant to use the information I obtained to analyze the comparative costs of using Vancil vs. building a new unnecessary water tank. You won't find a comparison in the Staff Report, I don't have the credentials to be taken seriously and I asked the City Manager if staff might be looking further into it and got a very polite no.
Well, now my curiosity is piqued; you say that your attorney's fees will be "very little", yet you refuse to disclose exactly how much those fees are.
ReplyDeleteI am a resident of Fortuna, and as I will be paying a portion of those fees if you prevail, then I feel that it is reasonable that you disclose how much your attorney fees are.
Otherwise, you are hiding information - just like you accused the city employees of doing.
It's really simple, rather than say that "it's very little compared to what we pay staff to fritter months denying me the records", you could simply disclose the amount.
Also, the above statement of yours that I quoted is completely nonsensicle. If staff was not providing you information, then it stands to reason that they were doing other things. That's hardly "frittering away hours".
"denying me the records" then, actually meant that they did nothing, thus we did not pay the city employees ANYTHING in this endeavor, so your statement that your attorney's fees are "very little" in comparison false.
How about a little sunshine on this - how much are your attorney's fees going to cost us, the Citizens of Fortuna?
I hope you have the courage to let this be posted and provide an honest answer to the question.
How Much?
Of course staff was doing other things, they are busy, hardworking employees. It took time from other things to answer my email requests, answer the phone or come to the counter to tell me that the only public record on using Vancil would be the Staff Report, and I would have to wait until it was released to see it. Of course the City Manager had way more important things to do than spend an hour or two talking to me about whether preliminary records should be released. That isn't to say that I don't appreciate that he was gracious and pleasant. In hindsight perhaps I should have refused to talk to him, it would have saved the city money. But I think we both hoped that there was a chance to settle the issue.
ReplyDeleteAlso, it took time for me to research the California Public Records Act and write/call/go to City Hall. There is no cost to Fortuna for my time. But if I had been successful it would have saved the City money, which is why I hesitated time and again before taking that next step. Please understand that I did not want to sue my city.
As to the fees: Having confirmed with my attorney that I received the preliminary records and could still request any records that staff may have overlooked, I instructed him end the lawsuit. I later confirmed that the city had been notified and had made no response. Last week I signed a declaration which is needed for Mr. Boylan to proceed with obtaining his fees. He has a legal and moral right to be paid for his work.
As to the amount: I would be happy to disclose it, but I don't know. If you want know how much attorneys' fees (remember there are two) are going to cost the city, you will have to ask someone privy to what is said in Closed Session. I can't tell you what I don't know. That is the honest truth.
I ask you: do you want to save us, the rate payers of Fortuna, money? If so, you would want to know if the information I obtained shows that money can be saved. Another anonymous commenter berated me for having the audacity to suggest that I was competent to say it did. So it seems that another expert needs to be hired, are you willing to help?
How Much?
Janelle, So, let me get this straight... The City was wrong for not giving you the information you seeked but it is okay for your attorney to keep you in the dark regarding the amount of his fees? I find it very, very hard to believe that you have no idea what your attorney is charging our city. If this really is the case, how dare you be so cavalier about how much this is going to cost? Having worked in the legal field in the past, I can assure you that these fees will be shocking and astronomical and this is perhaps why you are being so vague. Please, make the call to your attorney and elighten yourself and the rest of us. We would like to know how much this is going to cost us. You hired the attorney!!!
ReplyDeleteBelieve what you will. I hired my attorney at his advertised fee, which happened to be the same as the other CPRA attorney I talked with about the case. The costs of the City's attorney and my attorney could have been avoided had the lawsuit been avoided. I did what I could to avoid the suit, then I did what I could to keep my attorney's time spent on this to a minimum. That is all I know. Please, call someone privy to Closed Session items, I'm sure they know.
ReplyDeleteIf you are worried about excess costs, how about the $4.5 million that is going to be spent on the unnecessary water tank?
Unnecessary according to who, Janelle? That would be you, and admitted NONexpert in this area. From what I understand,the EXPERTS have determined that the water tank IS necessary.
ReplyDeleteAm I happy about my water and sewer bills? No, but I know for a fact my neice's water bills are quite high in Orange County; they are going up everywhere throughout california and the western US.
I also know that I am very unhappy about having some supposed watchdog who is purposefully vague about how much her attorney is going to cost US the citizens of fortuna, because when you say "the City" will have to pay for it, that means those of us who live here.
Thanks a bunch.
Oh, so what exactly was "the advertised fee"?
ReplyDeleteDear 10:03 Anonymous, Thanks for asking about the reservoir:
ReplyDeleteZone 1 needs 2 million gallons of water storage. As there is only about one million gallons of storage now at Stewart Street, Vancil reservoir has been providing backup storage for Zone 1.
The 5 million gallon Vancil reservoir provides 1 million gallons of storage for Zones 2-5. That leaves TWICE the amount required, four million gallons of storage, in Vancil reservoir. We, the rate payers, just spent over $500,000 relining and updating the inflow and out flows of Vancil.
It does seem a bit much to now spend over $4,000,000 to build another tank about 1/4 mile away on the same ridgeline. Remember, too, that only one of the current Zone 1 reservoirs is leaking and we will need to remove the other reservoir, with a 1/2 million gallons of storage, to build the new 2 million gallon tank.
The end result of spending $4million: One part of Fortuna will have 7 million gallons of storage, but only 3 million gallons of need. Another part Fortuna, will still have only 1 million gallons of storage and 1 AND A HALF million gallons of need.
The need and cost information is from an expert's report. Please, before scolding me on not addressing the other issues that have been raised to justify this project go to Fortunacitizen.blogspot.com. There you will find the questions I have asked and what I have found.
Thanks for your interest.
Dear 10:03 Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYes, when I say the City, I mean WE have to pay the costs of the lawsuit. Remember, too, that we are paying for the CITY's attorney also.
I am not being vague, I have told you what I know, or at least remember, from 5 months ago. For the third and last time: Go ask those who have the information how much it is going to cost us for the TWO attorneys.
The truth is: I don't need to know the exact amount to be at least as unhappy about it as you are. But what is the point of being unhappy? My time and energy has returned to trying to save our city a couple million dollars.
Sorry I couldn't be of more help.
Janelle,
ReplyDeleteAgain, let me get this straight...
You can spend countless days and hours pouring over city records, attending meetings, clogging up the counter at city hall and creating and writing ad nauseum on this blog but you can't make a simple phone call to YOUR attorney, the attorney YOU hired, to ask him the amount of his bill to the city of Fortuna? Come on. How can you criticize others for withholding information when that is exactly what you are doing. I would like to know the amount your attorney is charging the city for his services. Simple. I don't need a lecture about how much the city is spending on water tanks. I didn't ask that question. I asked you how much your attorney's bill is. It is so typical of folks who don't want to answer simple questions to quickly change the subject to something they think is "bigger and badder" like you did. Don't refer me to someone privy to "closed session" records. Those are private and not accessible to the public. Are you suggesting that I get someone to break the law and give me the amount talked about in a closed session? Wow, your credibility is rapidly plummeting. Please quit the doublespeak and just answer the question.
After your following pithy comment below:
ReplyDelete"The need and cost information is from an expert's report. Please, before scolding me on not addressing the other issues that have been raised to justify this project go to Fortunacitizen.blogspot.com. There you will find the questions I have asked and what I have found."
I just had to go to fortuna citizen and see what there was to see. This is what I found:
"draft of cost estimates for 2 MG reservoir and using Vancil reservoir.
Please note that in this draft there are some remaining unknowns and possible errors as the person who prepared this is neither an accountant nor an engineer. The important thing is that there is now a draft comparison and hopefully soon a definitive cost comparison."
Gosh, I'm not an expert in Medical Diagnosis, as I'm not a Doctor, but I really don't think you have that fatal disease that Doctor diagnosed you with, one that is easily treated. The important thing is, we now have a different opinion to compare it to. Feel free to ignore the expert's opinion.
When asked CONTINUALLY for the amount of YOUR attorney's fee, you have the umitigated gall to say (amongst other lame excuses):
"I am not being vague, I have told you what I know, or at least remember, from 5 months ago."
HOW MUCH ARE YOUR ATTORNEY'S FEES? HAVE YOU NOT RECEIVED A BILL?
Criminy, you are as bad as the people you accuse of withholding information supposedly are.
"Please, call someone privy to Closed Session items, I'm sure they know."
ReplyDeleteI am stunned and aghast to see you suggest that I ask somebody to break the law like that. To have somebody disclose closed session information is a gross violation of the law. And YOU are watching out for US?
Do you realize how much that shreds your credibility? That is just..well, I am at a loss for words to describe this lack of regard for the law and the rights of others.
So, let me get this straight...
ReplyDeleteA minor comes to me and says, "I want cigarettes, but it is illegal for me to get them from the store. I want them so you have give me cigarettes." My answer would have to be, "Sorry, you will just have to wait until it is legal for you to have them."
I didn't realize I was suggesting you do something illegal. Glad you knew that, and saved some staff time. Thanks for the information.
Janelle,
ReplyDeleteYou do continue to amaze. It is not illegal for YOU to give the information I seek. DUH. Only those who were present in the closed session cannot talk about what was discussed in the session. You, on the other hand, have every legal right and RESONSIBILITY to pass along the amount you have cost our city. But, again, you are not answering the question. I am not surprised by your behavior, only disappointed. I was just hoping that maybe you were not another zealot who goes off on an expensive tangent because they are bored in their life. Go figure. Obviously you are just another one of those "do as I say, not as I do" types.
Janelle,
ReplyDeleteYour analogy is totally flawed; let's fix it, shall we?
Let's substitute Lemons for cigarettes, and make the bold assumption that they are legal for all to buy or obtain.
Now let's take your wayward minor who in your unfortunate analogy was trying to obtain cigarettes.
If he went to Safeway and asked the teller to GIVE him lemons, the teller would be forbidden to do so unless the teller or lad paid for the lemon. It would be illegal. It would be wrong.
However, if he went to his neighbor with the lovely lemon tree and asked for a lemon, it would not be illegal for his neighbor to give the boy one.
You continue to dodge a question. How much was YOUR attorney's bill? Surely you know. All your deflection is quite tiresome. It defies rational thought to believe your attorney has not billed you. He or she obviously HAS, and you are embarassed to reveal the amount because it must be some huge amount, something totally unreasonable like five or six thousand dollars.
My analogy is fine. You told me it is illegal to get the information but I should give it to you. What right do you have to demand this? Is the lad claiming to be 18?
ReplyDeleteNow lets talk about the California Public Records Act. My layman's understanding: Most records are public and access must be allowed. Some records are required to be maintained confidential and it is illegal to allow access, primarily to protect other rights such as individual privacy rights. Some records fall in a middle area and are exempt from access, but the City has the ability to allow access if it chooses.
You state categorically that it is illegal for the city to give you the lemons or cigarettes or the information you want. Now if you are right, it is because of a conflicting right or public interest. Therefore IF I knew the costs for the two attorneys I would have a legal, or least moral, responsibility to ask why I should release the information to anyone.
Why would either attorney send me the bill? It is my understanding that The Public Records Act provides that if access to public records is denied the remedy is to file a lawsuit asking the court to mandate access. If records are then produced, the public agency is responsible for the costs. It is my understanding that the bill was sent directly to the City. I do not have the information you want.
Your analogy is fatally flawed. YOU were not part of the closed session proceedings.
ReplyDeleteI never told you it was illegal to obtain the amount of your attorney's bill, I told you it was illegal to for someone who is part of a closed session to disclose any part of that session. YOU were not part of that closed session, so it is perfecly legal to for you disclose that information. PERIOD.
I really cannot understand why you are being so vapidly disingenous, Janelle. Are you embarrased by the amount your attorney is charging?
Why do you continue to bring in other variables, Janelle, I did not ask you for the cost of the City's attorney; I asked what YOUR attorney billed YOU.
Back to the your twisting of the example, though - YOU brought up asking someone who was privy to closed session proceedings to reveal what went on in those proceedings. It is a very reasonable assumption to believe that the amount of your legal bill, if discussed at all, was a very small part of that closed session. I am sure other issues pertaining to this silly suit were discussed. Again, it is illegal for those closed session proceedings to be disclosed.
That most certainly does NOT preclude from answering the very simple question of how much YOUR attorney billed YOU.
You say: "Why would either attorney send me the bill?"
Are you nuts Janelle? I did not ask how much the city's attorney billed, nor would I assume that he or she would send you the bill; however, the thought that your OWN ATTORNEY would not send you a copy of YOUR BILL is outight lunacy.
YOUR ATTORNEY would send YOU the bill to PAY him or her, as if you do not prevail, the city does not have to pay, and, gosh, then you'd have to pay.
On the other hand, we the citizens of Fortuna have the right to know how much you have put us on the hook for.
Dear Anonymous(es),
ReplyDeleteI understand that some may feel that I am responsible for my attorney's fees because I hired him.
I understand that some may feel very strongly that I am lying about whether Mr. Boylan sent me a bill. I assure you I am not.
I understand that some may feel very strongly that we the citizens of Fortuna have the right to know all the costs involved in this lawsuit and I know that not all records are public records. You may be right, and you may be wrong, I do not know.
That you are interested in how the City's money is spent is a wonderful thing. Thank you.
Janelle will never call her attorney because deep down she doesn't want to know what he charged for this utterly worthless lawsuit.
ReplyDeleteI can guarantee you it is probably a lot more that she thinks. Those kind of lawyers are always after what they consider deep pockets.
And after all is said and done the tank will still be built because the City Council is going to take the advice of the "experts" not someone who has nothing better to do but "pretend" they are an expert. Thanks Janelle. NOT!
OMG! Almost $20,000 dollars!!!! R U Kidding me? Seriously Janelle, was it worth it?
ReplyDeleteSo far Anonymous(es)have guessed:
ReplyDelete--at least fifty thousand or more
--cannot imagine they'd be much more than 500 dollars or so
--I can assure you that these fees will be shocking and astronomical
--Almost $20,000 dollars!
Will the real amount please stand up.
Yes, I am making a joke about this. Be as upset as you wish, berate, make demands, be irate, challenge, harangue, and get over it.
Excuse me while I wait patiently to see what the amount will be. Welcome to lawsuit land.
Please feel free to continue to share your thoughts, but please remember: Differing opinions welcome. Personal Attacks are taken for what they are, acts of desperation or plain mean spiritedness.
Janelle, The document your lawyer filed are now public record and can be accessed by anyone. When I said almost $20,000 I was not making a joke. According to the record your attorney is trying to make the City pay $450 an hour with a total of almost $20,000 with room to grow!
ReplyDeleteOpen your eyes to reality Janelle. Your little vendetta may cost the taxpayers a boatload of money.
I'm glad you got the information you were looking for. Public records are a wonderful source of information. Thanks for sharing the info, have to admit I was a bit curious.
ReplyDeleteAbout half-way between the $500 and $50,000 predictions, huh? Nothing personal, but I think I'll wait to comment on the amount until it is verified by an un-anonymous source; except to note that all of this could have been avoided 8 or 9 months ago...
My eyes are open. I have no vendetta. But I can't help wondering what motivates the poison-pen comments.
That's quite a bill to be on the hook for Janelle, I hope your savings your pennies, nickels and dimes.
ReplyDeleteThat's why it is absolutely ludicrous to believe you had no idea how much your attorney's bill was, is or will be - YOU will be paying it if you do not prevail in your suit against the city.
A simple phone call to your attorney would "verify" things (in the extremely unlikely event you do not have a copy of the bill already.
Here's one point to ponder: How can we citizens of Fortuna trust you to be some kind of watchdog when you cannot even keep track of the costs YOUR attorney is incurring? Amazing!
How sad it is that you are now censoring posts asking legitimate questions regarding how much you have possibly cost the city; in fact you better hope that the 12,000 or so residents bear the cost of your twenty plus thousand dollar folly; thats only 1.67 per resident if you win.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise its all on you, Janelle.
BTW, questioning you, your disingenuousness, your blatant disregard for honest questions and other honest skeptism don't make these comments "poison pen comment". Rather, they make those comments what you aspire (supposedly) to be - a seeker of the truth.
When dealing with attorneys, a simple phone call costs money.
ReplyDeleteI have tried to avoid unnecessary costs, first by trying to avoid a lawsuit.
I am concerned about spending over 4 million dollars on a new water tank when we have Vancil reservoir. I tried to obtain records about the possibility of using Vancil. That is our right under the Public Records Act.
I had to file a lawsuit to obtain records, which I now have.
It is my understanding that the city MAY choose, if advised by their attorney, to discuss litigation in closed session "when discussion in open session concerning those matters would prejudice the position of the local agency in the litigation."
If it would not prejudice the position of the city, they can talk about it.
They aren't talking about it, so why would you ask me to prejudice the position of the city?
I did not ask so I could give an honest answer. But, now I have been pulled back into 'lawsuit land' so now I must ask you:
What right have anonymous commenters to demand that I prejudice my position?
I'm sorry, you have none.
I have found some of the language used here at times harsh and insulting. They are made safely as anonymous comments. I wonder why is there a need for either harshness or anonymity? It is the combination of the two which prompted a desperate use of the term poison-pen. Honest questions and honest skepticism need not be harsh or anonymous.
I hope you had a good weekend. Sorry, if it appeared that I was censoring you, I wasn't around to moderate.
I have found some of your language nauseatingly condescending, Janelle.
ReplyDeleteTo believe that you dont have any idea how much that YOU could be on the hook for if you do not prevail in your suit strains your credibility beyond reason. That you catoragize this as harsh is silly. That it is anonymous makes these questions and skeptism no less relevant than if I attached my name to this.
But...if it makes you feel any better, my name is Frank.
ReplyDeleteJune 1 Anonymous-- I agree, some of my comments might have seemed nauseatingly condescending. Faced with what felt like harsh and insulting comments from unknown sources, I did my best.
ReplyDeletePlease read my May 29 and 31 comments again. I honestly said I didn't know what the bill was. Of course I had some idea, but that is all.
How does one respond to comments such as these: gouging the city, refuse to disclose, cavalier, supposed watchdog, purposefully vague, utterly worthless lawsuit, "pretend"... expert, little vendetta, someone who has nothing better to do, absolutely ludicrous...?
I tried to set them aside and respond to the rest of the comment/question, remembering I what my mother always told me: “If the shoe fits, wear it; otherwise leave it for the owner.” Sometimes, being human, I throw the shoe back. Such a silly thing to do.
Perhaps I was wrong and all the comments were simply expressing questions and honest skepticism. I have no way of knowing. But consider this:
One commenter wrote: “According to the record your attorney is trying to make the City pay $450 an hour with a total of almost $20,000 with room to grow!”
Well, I was in court last Thursday and learned that my attorney's bill is $26,000. Was the commenter's amount error a typo? I like to assume it was. In 'lawsuit land' such assumptions can be costly.
Frank-- From the information I have from Google Analytics I think you might be new to this discussion. Thanks for giving a first name. Can you take a joke? I hope so because frankly you still remain anonymous.
And that is OK, because at least your comments won't be mistaken for one of Anonymous(es)' comments.
Your attorney has ran up a TWENTY SIX THOUSAND DOLLAR BILL???
ReplyDeleteDoing exactly what? Hopefully we the citizens won't have to bear this cost, but if we do, somebody's head needs to roll at the city, like that corruopt manager riggy.
Doing Exactly what? Paul Boylan was acting on my behalf to obtain public records, and in a larger sense on behalf of all of us to bring more openness, based on a 'Sunshine' law, to our our city government.
ReplyDeleteHeads rolling? How about we all just use it as a learning experience?
Corruption can be a serious charge of illegitimate personal gain. I have NOT seen that, but if you think you have evidence of this you should talk to a City Council member, or perhaps a member of the County Grand Jury.
Of course limiting the access to information and decision makers to only a select few can lead to another type of corruption, the control of our city government by a chosen few. And that is why we have 'sunshine' laws. The California Public Records Act provides access to many, if not most, government records. The Brown Act forces the discussion and decision making into the arena of the public meeting. Neither of these laws make the government more open or democratic, we do that when we participate.
And yes, unfortunately $26,000 is what it may cost us. But it is nothing compared to spending $4,000,000 on a new water tank when Vancil is there and holds more than enough water.
Thanks so much for your comment, as I was typing I had this thought: Vancil is the 1964 Stewart Street Replacement Project, and installing the piping to use it is one of those long deferred projects our water rates were raised to pay for.