Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Shitty of jewplin

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Open records request made for emails between city attorney and investigator

    Open records request made for emails between city attorney and investigator

    By Wally Kennedy
    news@joplinglobe.com
    March 22, 2014


    http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstorie...d-investigator
    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0376#post10376

    JOPLIN, Mo. — Citing Missouri’s Sunshine Law, the Joplin Globe has requested 11 email communications from the city that occurred between City Attorney Brian Head and Tom Loraine, the Osage Beach attorney who was hired by the City Council to investigate ethical questions involving two of its members.

    The emails, which were sent between Oct. 17 and Dec. 17, were referenced in the billing statement submitted by Loraine to the city on Feb. 18. The city provided a copy of the itemized bill on March 5 after the Globe requested it under the Sunshine Law.

    Head, in an interview on Friday, said he does not think he had any direct communication with Loraine in those emails. He said the emails were from Loraine’s staff to him with regard to the setting up of interviews with witnesses and to the creation of a hotline that witnesses could call, among other things.

    He said it is likely the requested emails will be provided within a few days.

    “All of it is pretty easy to review,” he said. “We could cite attorney-client privilege and withhold them, but there is no need for that, in my opinion.”

    Head said Sunshine Law requests for information with regard to the investigation have been handed off to Peter Edwards, the city’s other attorney. Head said he wanted those requests to be looked at by “completely fresh eyes.”

    The billing statement makes reference to Loraine’s review of a tape on Oct. 30. It is not clear from the statement whether the tape reviewed was that of a 911 call that led to a domestic report at the home of former City Manager Mark Rohr on Dec. 29, 2012.

    Rohr has said that Loraine’s decision to look into the 911 call is evidence of a conspiracy by some City Council members and city employees to refocus the investigation and oust him as city manager. The call was in reference to a family argument that had previously been looked at by the council without consequence in April 2013.

    Head said, “I did not give him the tape. I don’t know precisely how he got that tape or was made aware of its existence. It might have been in the file we provided to him about that incident, but I doubt that.”

    Loraine, in a Feb. 20 letter to the council, said that he thought he had “unfettered” authority to look into whatever came before him. As he took depositions in the probe, Loraine said, “Mr. Rohr’s conduct loomed larger than those issues originally outlined concerning Messrs. (Bill) Scearce and (Mike) Woolston.

    “As more witnesses were deposed, including both city employees and local citizens, it became clear that the issues surrounding Mr. Rohr could not be ignored, as they related to the core functioning of the city government itself.”

    Rohr, who was fired without cause on Feb. 4 at the close of a late-night meeting in which Loraine’s report and conclusions were given to the council, has maintained that he was never supposed to have been a target of the investigation.

    How Loraine learned about the 911 tape and police report remains unclear. Loraine has not responded to numerous calls to talk about the investigation since it was released last month. Loraine’s staff did not respond on Friday to a message that requested an interview with the Globe.

    “These questions are questions that Tom has to answer,” Head said. “I did not sit in on the interviews that he conducted.”

    Joplin police Chief Lane Roberts has said the department provided the investigator with the report and a tape of the 911 call that led to the domestic incident report.

    Head said he did not provide Loraine with the names of witnesses he should interview.

    “Witnesses called on the hotline. Tom asked who is this person and could I get them to come and testify. In that sense, I was a liaison to ask someone to testify,” Head said.

    “A witness list develops after one person says something about someone who they say knows something, and that in turn leads to the next witness and the next witness after that, and so on.”

    It would appear from the billing statement that both Councilman Scearce and Benjamin Rosenberg had separately sought the drafting of resolutions to terminate Rohr’s employment from Head and Attorney Karl Blanchard, respectively.

    Head said, “Scearce approached me a week or so before Tom presented his report to the council and asked me for a resolution that he could use to terminate Rohr. Shortly after that, Scearce told me he intended to put my name forward as interim city manager.

    “When he told me that, I backed off. I told him I could not do the resolution. I could not advise on that stuff because I now had a conflict. All of the stuff that had been previously prepared, I gave to Karl (Blanchard). Here it is.”

    In addition to the emails, the billing statement makes reference to 27 telephone calls that occurred between Loraine or his staff between Oct. 17 and Feb. 5. Head said most of those telephone calls coincide with the periods in which Loraine visited Joplin to conduct his investigation.

    The travel expenses for Loraine, according to the billing statement, were by the hour, at a rate of $175 per hour.

    An example would be an entry on Jan. 28 in which Loraine had a brief telephone conference with Head, prepared for a deposition with Woolston, deposed Woolston for two hours and traveled back to his lake home, which took four hours. The total number of hours was 6 1/2. The fee was $1,137.50.

    Earlier that day, he billed 5 1/2 hours for a staff meeting, the travel time to Joplin, a brief telephone conference with Head and a one hour deposition with Rohr. That cost $962.50.

    The 12 hours totaled $2,100, of which he was paid $1,400 for driving his vehicle to and from Joplin. Mileage expenses of 50.5 per mile were also charged, along with food, gas and lodging expenses that would amount approximately to $1,100 to $1,300 per trip.

    According to the billing statement, Loraine made seven trips to Joplin.

    Councilman Gary Shaw, who had objected at a previous council meeting to some of the fees paid to Loraine, including the payment of $175 per hour for his driving time, in an interview on Friday, said the council majority approved those costs to get the matter behind them.

    “It’s old stuff now. It’s so aggravating to me,” Shaw said.

    The statement also shows that court reporter costs totaled $7,765.20 and that office rent totaled $1,400. That was in addition to the $72,290.83 invoice from Loraine which was paid in full earlier this month, according Leslie Haase, the city’s finance director. The council had authorized an expenditure of $45,000, but Loraine, in a letter to Head, said the final cost could exceed $75,000.

    The city has had in its possession for the past two weeks copies of the 53 interviews that Loraine conducted, according to Councilman Morris Glaze. Glaze, in an interview on Friday, said he has spent six hours reading 40 of those interviews but could not discuss their content.

    He said he has not been permitted to read 13 interviews that involved current city employees because of reasons related to personnel matters.

    On tap

    NINE PAGES of Tom Loraine’s report are about former City Manager Mark Rohr and have been withheld by the city as a personnel record. Rohr has declined to release those pages on the advice of his attorney. The Globe has filed a lawsuit seeking a court order to disclose the full report, exhibits and testimony. It is to be heard March 31.


    All the shit unfit to print

    http://www.joplinglobe.com

    Comment


    • #17
      Residents bid goodbye to former Joplin city manager at reception

      Residents bid goodbye to former Joplin city manager at reception

      By Debby Woodin
      news@joplinglobe.com
      March 25, 2014


      http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x54.../?state=taberU
      http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0384#post10384


      JOPLIN, Mo. — About 150 people attended a reception Tuesday night at Central Christian Center to bid farewell to Mark Rohr, Joplin’s former city manager.

      They waited in line up to 45 minutes for their turn to speak to Rohr or shake hands.

      Rohr was fired by a 5-4 vote of the City Council on Feb. 4 after results of a council-ordered investigation were revealed to the council. That investigation, Rohr’s firing and the $82,000 bill from the investigator sparked a public controversy that continued Tuesday as petitions seeking a state audit of the probe and its cost were circulated among those who came to salute Rohr.

      Rohr said of the reception, held by Councilman Gary Shaw, “It’s very heartwarming to see the support that the community’s demonstrated towards me and the things we have tried to accomplish in Joplin, and I’m very appreciative.”

      He said he has mixed feelings about leaving for the new job he starts Monday as city manager of League City, Texas.

      “A big part of my heart will always be in Joplin, but I also am looking forward to my new responsibilities,” he said. “I want to see things happen in a positive manner in Joplin, but I’ve got another area of focus now and I owe it to the citizens of League City, Texas, to concentrate my efforts on what’s going on down there and trying to improve that community.”

      Rohr said he had come to no conclusions yet about whether he would take any court action regarding his firing, which he said earlier did not comply with the city’s Home Rule Charter.

      “I think it’s pretty evident that the citizens have some cleaning up to do in the town,” he said. “They’ve got a chance to do that in two weeks here,” alluding to the City Council election on April 8. “They have some other things they need to fix after that, and the citizens of Joplin, in my estimation, need to demand that they have nine City Council members that have no other agenda than the best interests of the city of Joplin, and that’s not what they have right now.”

      Nine pages of the investigative report are about Rohr and have been withheld by city officials, who contend that part of the report is confidential as a personnel record.

      Rohr has declined to release his copy of those pages. “Under legal advice, I’ve been advised not to do that at this point in time,” he said Tuesday. “I’ve had some consultations with my attorney. There’s nothing in there I’m concerned about. The city’s got themselves in a little bit of a jam in terms of how they’ve handled things, and I think we’ll just let that play out.”

      The Joplin Globe is seeking a court order directing the city to release the report as a public record. An evidentiary hearing on that request is scheduled for Monday in Jasper County Circuit Court in Joplin.

      Jane Cage, chairwoman of the Citizens Advisory Recovery Team, a group that was formed to take public input on the types of projects residents wanted to see as part of the city’s recovery from the 2011 tornado, helped Shaw organize the reception.

      Cage, asked if she has concerns about whether those plans will be carried out with Rohr gone, said: “Mark was a strong proponent and a visionary for recovery. And I believe we’ll miss his leadership. I do think, however, that all of us who are committed to recovery will step up to make sure that what citizens said was important to them is accomplished.”

      Among those who attended the reception was Kathy Wilson, who formerly served on the City Council when five members resigned before a recall election after firing a city manager.

      Wilson said she came to see Rohr “just to let him know that he had the people’s support who admired his leadership.” Asked what she appreciated about his leadership, she said: “The way he took the helm after the tornado. I know that there were a lot of people who participated in putting the town back together again, but it always takes leaders. There are leaders and there are followers.”

      Ramona Ellis, who attends Central Christian Center where Rohr and his family also attend church, said: “I like Mark, and I thought he did an excellent job in the tornado. He’s always there for everybody. He’s got a big heart for a lot of people here.”

      Her husband, Troy Ellis, participated in the “Walk of Unity” on the one-year anniversary of the Joplin tornado. He said he came to the reception because “Mark Rohr has done an awesome job serving Joplin. He will be missed. He was a great leader. We appreciate everything he’s done for Joplin, and I think we ought to stand behind people who do an awesome job for this town.”

      Goodbye

      COUNCILMAN GARY SHAW said the reception was held because “there’s an awful lot of people who thought an awful lot of Mark.” There were many, he said, who “just wanted to have an opportunity” to say goodbye.

      .

      All the shit unfit to print

      http://www.joplinglobe.com

      Comment


      • #18
        City discloses emails; FBI correspondence among the items made public

        By Debby Woodin
        news@joplinglobe.com
        March 27, 2014


        http://www.joplinglobe.com/local/x19...ms-made-public
        http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0392#post10392


        — Emails between Joplin’s city attorney and private investigator Tom Loraine show that the city attorney sent a draft of a contract for employment, scheduled city witnesses and set up a telephone hot line for the investigator.

        Correspondence seeking the disclosure of FBI reports regarding Councilman Bill Scearce also is disclosed.

        The Globe filed a request last week for emails between the attorneys. Those disclosed as a result of the Globe’s request under Missouri’s open records law show none directly between the special investigator and City Attorney Brian Head. The emails that were disclosed were directed to and received from Loraine paralegal Nancy J. Gazca.

        Loraine, of Osage Beach, was hired by the City Council to investigate ethical questions involving two council members, Scearce and Mike Woolston, and how a note in Mark Rohr’s handwriting came to be in Scearce’s possession. Loraine’s report on the investigation resulted in the firing of Rohr, the city manager, by a split vote of the council.

        The emails, which were sent from late October through December, were listed among the billings Loraine submitted to the city that totaled nearly $82,000. The city provided a copy of the itemized bill on March 5 after the Globe requested it under the Sunshine Law.

        Initial emails between Head and Gazca are dated Oct. 25 and concern an employment contract for Loraine’s services. Head sent a final proposed draft, and that was returned Oct. 28 with the investigator’s initials, “TEL,” written in the margins.

        The investigation directed Loraine to look into the involvement of Scearce with a convicted bookmaker, Kenneth Lovett. Scearce in the 1990s rented an office to Lovett where he conducted his bookmaking operation. Scearce was asked by the Globe if he knew Lovett was a bookmaker at the time he rented the office to him. Scearce at first told the Globe that he did not know about the gambling operation, but, after the council authorized the probe, he called the Globe to say that he wanted to clarify that he did find out about the bookmaking operation after Lovett moved into the office.

        The Globe had filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the FBI in September 2012 for a copy of the investigative reports regarding a public corruption and gambling probe that resulted in Lovett’s indictment. To date, the Globe has not received those documents.

        On Nov. 11, Head was sent a copy of a brief letter the Loraine firm sent to the FBI’s chief division counsel in Kansas City requesting a meeting to obtain information “regarding the involvement and conviction of Mr. Kenny Levitt and the possible involvement of Alderman William Scearce.” Head sent an email back correcting the name from Levitt to Lovett.

        Head filed a Freedom of Information Act request on Nov. 18, which the council had directed at an earlier meeting.

        “Approximately one year ago, the Joplin Globe, the local newspaper in Joplin, Missouri, made a request related to an investigation or interview of Mr. William Scearce Sr.,” Head’s request reads in part. “We restate their request and ask that any documents provided to the Joplin Globe also be provided to the city of Joplin, Missouri.”

        In Loraine’s final report, he said the chief counsel of the FBI said he did not believe there was still an open investigation regarding the gambling. Head’s open records request could be expedited only by filing a lawsuit or by Scearce filing a waiver for disclosure.

        Scearce’s attorney filed that waiver, Loraine reported. Loraine said in his report that his scrutiny essentially cleared Scearce of any wrongdoing.

        Lawsuit

        NINE PAGES of Tom Loraine’s report to the Joplin City Council were withheld by the city, with officials characterizing them as having become a part of Mark Rohr’s personnel record. The Globe has filed a lawsuit seeking release of the nine pages on grounds that they are a public record. A hearing on the suit is slated for Monday in Jasper County Circuit Court.


        All the shit unfit to print

        http://www.joplinglobe.com

        Comment


        • #19
          About the Joplin Globe, Mark Rohr, and the Joplin Police

          About the Joplin Globe, Mark Rohr, and the Joplin Police


          http://rturner229.blogspot.com/2014/...nd-joplin.html
          http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0399#post10399


          .

          In its March 16 edition, the Joplin Globe revealed that part of the investigation that resulted in the firing of City Manager Mark Rohr centered on a 911 call and domestic dispute that took place at Rohr's home on December 29, 2012.

          The police investigated, determined that no crime had been committed, and closed the investigation.

          Nearly two weeks have passed and nothing more has been written about this in the area's newspaper of record, yet the Globe article leaves many questions unanswered and many more unasked.

          - When did the Joplin Globe first know about the 911 call and the police visit to Rohr's house? It stands to reason Globe editors and reporters knew about this long before March 16, and frequent Globe guest columnist Anson Burlingame recently wrote on his blog that Editor Carol Stark was already aware of the incident. When did she know and why was nothing ever written about it in the pages of the Globe? A 911 call from the home of the City Manager would seem to be a newsworthy event, even if the news was just dispelling rumors. At this time, it was already well known that Rohr's time at Piqua, Ohio, ended with him filing a libel suit against someone who had said that the police had made a number of visits to his house on domestic incident reports. Rohr won the lawsuit, but if nothing else, the coincidence should have made the Globe take a closer look into the Joplin incident.

          - Why did the Joplin Police not call in an outside agency to investigate the situation? When the person who is being investigated is the man who hires and fires the police chief, there would seem to be a conflict of interest. Usually in this type of case, the Missouri Highway Patrol is called in, even when the matter seems to be routine. There is no indicating in the March 16 story that the Globe even asked Joplin Police Chief Lane Roberts that question.

          - Why did Roberts refuse to sit down with investigator Tom Loraine for an interview? He turned over the tape of the 911 call and the police report, but he did nothing to dispel the rumors that there was a cover up.

          - Though Missouri law leaves the matter to the police officers' discretion, some states require that at least one of the parties in a domestic abuse situation be removed from the location as a precaution. What is the Joplin Police Department's policy and was it followed on December 29, 2012 or was preferential treatment provided to Mark Rohr?

          - Do Joplin Globe Editor Carol Stark and Publisher Michael Beatty provide preferential treatment to their friends?
          .

          The answer to the last question is obvious.


          Posted by Randy at 7:49 AM Friday, March 28. 2014


          ___666___666___666___



          The Turner Diaries RULES, The Turner Report drools

          Comment


          • #20
            Judge orders city of Joplin to make report public

            Judge orders city of Joplin to make report public

            By Debby Woodin
            news@joplinglobe.com
            March 31, 2014


            http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstorie...-report-public
            http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0413#post10413


            Judge David Mouton responds to rebuttal from Karl Blanchard,
            outside counsel for the City of Joplin, at the Jasper County
            courthouse concerning the Joplin Globe's request for an open
            records disclosure on Monday, March 31.

            .

            JOPLIN, Mo. — A Jasper County circuit judge on Monday said he would issue a writ sought by The Joplin Globe and its parent company, Community Newspaper Holdings Inc., ordering public disclosure of a report the city has withheld regarding the former city manager along with its exhibits and testimony.

            The Globe’s publisher, Mike Beatty, placed the significance of the ruling on the importance of the documents to the public.

            “I think getting the document is not as important to the Globe as it is important for our community,” he said. “Joplin residents deserve to know what is happening in our city government with full disclosure, particularly now during Joplin’s redevelopment.”

            Chuck Buchanan, the Globe’s attorney, said of the procedure that will follow Monday’s decision: “The judge will order disclosure and will set a deadline for disclosure. And then the city will decide what action they want to take by the time that deadline arises. At this time, we don’t know whether the documents will be available immediately or whether there will be a long delay if the city decides to appeal.” The case was heard by Judge David Mouton in Joplin.

            City Attorney Brian Head said he does not agree with the judge’s decision, but it will be the City Council’s decision whether to appeal.

            “We don’t have the written decision, so it’s a little hard to know the court’s reasoning” for the decision, Head said. He said he believes the ruling “misapplies the law to the facts as they exist. We will have a meeting of the council within the next few days for the council to determine if it wishes to appeal. It will be my recommendation that the council appeal this decision.”

            Asked why he believes the law was misapplied, Head said: “All I know is the result. I don’t know if all the reasoning is correct. Once I see that, I’ll know specifically.” Asked if the council will hold the discussion on whether to appeal in an open meeting, Head said, “No, we don’t discuss litigation strategy in an open meeting.”

            The Globe sought a writ ordering the city to release a portion of a City Council investigation report about Mark Rohr, who was fired as city manager Feb. 4 after the report was given to the council. The council held an open meeting but went into closed session to hear the entire report. The council reconvened in open session, where part of the report was read by the special investigator, attorney Tom Loraine. After that, a motion was made to fire Rohr without cause, and the motion carried by a vote of 5-4.

            The investigation, authorized by the City Council, was to focus on the ethical conduct of two council members, Bill Scearce and Mike Woolston. Instead, its focus turned to Rohr.

            A portion of the report dealing with the two councilmen was released, but the city has withheld the part about Rohr and has denied access to some exhibits of the report and to testimony taken in the investigation. The city contends that the Rohr report is a personnel record that is closed to the public because it contains information regarding his job performance.

            But the council’s contract with the investigator specified that the report was to be open to the public. Instead, pages related to Rohr were withdrawn from the finished version of the report.

            At Monday’s hearing, Buchanan told the judge that it is “important to note this was an afterthought on the city’s part. It’s clear from the contract, and the (meeting) agenda that said nothing about personnel records.” The agenda of the Feb. 4 meeting shows that the council met in closed session under an exemption in the Sunshine Law for discussion of litigation, not for personnel decisions. Buchanan noted that there had been an effort by some members of the council after an Aug. 5 meeting to seek Rohr’s resignation, but there was a glitch when they learned that the vote had to be publicly disclosed.

            The city’s outside counsel, Karl Blanchard, told the judge: “The issue is: Are they exempt or closed? Does this have to do with the job performance of a city employee? If they do, they’re exempt.”

            The judge asked Blanchard: “Do you agree with the proposition that if a public meeting is closed under a certain exception to the Sunshine Law, that for example, that litigation and only litigation is discussed? And when litigation is the subject of that closed meeting is completed that you go back into open session?”

            Blanchard: “Judge, that is not an issue that has been raised by the writ. I haven’t taken a look at it.”

            Judge: “But it’s before me. You’re taking the position, as I understand it, that these records are closed because they are a personnel record, but it appears from your exhibit No. 10, as indicated by Mr. Buchanan, that the meeting was closed for litigation and not for hiring, firing, disciplining or promoting a particular employee.”

            Blanchard: “I thought it was closed to see Loraine’s report.”

            Judge: “Right. Under 610.021.1 (a section of the open records law), which is legal actions, causes of action, not personnel records.”

            Blanchard said he would have to research whether other procedures have to be followed if a meeting moves from one exemption to another.

            The attorneys asked to file written legal conclusions for the judge to consider.

            The judge said they could, but he was ready to rule.

            “I am not convinced that the records requested fall within any exception under the Sunshine Law,” Mouton said. “And it’s not just the case law. The Sunshine Law says itself that the exceptions are to be narrowly construed, and I don’t find that these records fall within any exception.”

            Mouton said that while he understands that the city wants to protect itself from a possible claim for wrongfully disclosing personal employee information, “I don’t know that a public entity can say that something is exempt under an exception that wasn’t claimed at the time they discussed it.”

            Final order

            CIRCUIT JUDGE DAVID MOUTON said he will prepare a final order requiring disclosure of the documents.

            .



            Will Peterson (left) and Charles Buchanan, attorneys representing the
            Joplin Globe, discuss their case concerning the Joplin Globe's request
            for an open records disclosure from the City of Joplin at Jasper County
            circuit court on Monday, March 31


            All the shit unfit to print

            http://www.joplinglobe.com

            Comment


            • #21
              The Globe Won (Round One at Least)

              The Globe Won (Round One at Least)

              by Anson Burlingame



              http://ansonburlingame.wordpress.com...won-round-one/
              http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0416#post10416

              Judge David Mouton said today in court that he would rule as the Globe request to approve a writ of Mandamus ordering the City of Joplin to release the entirety of the Loraine Investigation Report. Good news for those demanding transparency in government and bad news for people that want their privacy protected all the time, not matter what they say and against whom.

              In this case, I am one of the former, where transparency of events taking place within government is more important than protecting the rights of privacy for those advocating against certain people within government. Good work Globe to uphold that principle of demanding transparency in government.

              In the hearing the judge asked the attorney representing the City if his argument that anytime derogatory information of any sort was offered to government decision-makers about the actions of individuals should such information, testimony, statements officially made, should be withheld from the public view. The attorney said yes, as such is a matter of personnel records or performance.

              I leave to any sane reader to develop an example of how such a view, any and all statements about the performance of people in government, would be ridiculous, in the extreme. What if, for example, someone accused a policeman of being a pedophile? Should the accusation be withheld from public scrutiny? More important, what if the accusation was untrue? Should the accuser be held accountable for making such a statement for whatever reason? I don’t think so.

              There was more to the Globe position, argued quite well in my view by the attorney on behalf of the Globe and lamely countered by the attorney for the City. But all the details I am sure, or hope at least, will be reported by the Globe, thoroughly and soon.

              As to when the full report including all attachments will be released, who knows? This is only round one and appeals, etc. can further delay the legal process as I am sure some running for office on council certainly hope will happen.

              Wonder if their views on that decision by the judge will be asked tonight at the forum for all council candidates?


              You Nazis may be insane . . . .
              . . . . but us whiggers are typpycull!!!

              Comment


              • #22
                Our View: Don’t delay disclosure

                Our View: Don’t delay disclosure

                Anonymous From staff reports
                April 2, 2014


                Joplin City Council incumbents and newcomers alike were in accord Monday night at a candidate forum when asked about turmoil within the council and City Hall and its effect on the growth of Joplin.

                Virtually all of the candidates answered that they wanted to move Joplin forward, although most said they knew there were issues that had to be faced.

                The Joplin City Council could help the healing when it votes on whether to appeal a circuit court’s order to turn over documents from a taxpayer-funded investigation that so far have been kept secret from the public.

                Jasper County Judge David Mouton on Monday said he would issue a writ sought by The Joplin Globe and its parent company, Community Newspaper Holdings Inc., ordering public disclosure of a report the city has withheld regarding the former City Manager Mark Rohr along with its exhibits and testimony.

                The judge was direct when he said: “I am not convinced that the records requested (by the Globe) fall within any exception under the Sunshine Law. And it’s not just the case law. The Sunshine Law says itself that the exceptions are to be narrowly construed, and I don’t find that these records fall within any exception.”

                If the council votes to appeal the judge’s decision, it kicks the turmoil on down the road, but it certainly doesn’t clear the air or provide transparency.

                If council members are serious about wanting to get back on track, then they need to rip the cover off the festering wound and apply some much needed sunshine.

                Listen to the law, listen to the public. Release the documents.


                All the shit unfit to print

                http://www.joplinglobe.com

                Comment


                • #23
                  Joplin City Council decides to make probe records public

                  Joplin City Council decides to make probe records public

                  By Debby Woodin
                  news@joplinglobe.com
                  April 3, 2014



                  http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstorie...records-public
                  http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0434#post10434


                  JOPLIN, Mo. — Joplin residents are to find out today what is in the City Council investigation report that city administrators withheld from public view as a personnel record.

                  The City Council voted 6-3 Thursday night to waive an appeal of Circuit Judge David Mouton’s ruling ordering the city to disclose the pages of an investigation report regarding former City Manager Mark Rohr along with exhibits and witness testimony of the controversial probe.

                  City Attorney Brian Head said that as a result, the documents will be made public today.

                  Councilman Mike Woolston made the motion to not pursue an appeal and to disclose the records pursuant to a court order obtained by The Joplin Globe.

                  Councilman Jack Golden seconded the motion. Those who voted in favor were Woolston, Golden, Morris Glaze, Gary Shaw, Mike Seibert and Bill Scearce. Those who voted against it were Mayor Melodee Colbert-Kean, Trisha Raney and Benjamin Rosenberg.

                  Both the mayor and Raney said after the meeting that their reasons for voting against it were that they believed that city employees who testified in the probe should be protected.

                  At issue primarily were nine pages of an investigation report from a private investigator hired by the council to look into ethical questions about Scearce and Woolston. The investigator’s scrutiny expanded to Rohr and ultimately resulted in his firing as city manager on Feb. 4. Most of the report was disclosed, but the city kept nine pages dealing with Rohr under wraps, contending that they were personnel records. The Globe filed suit, contending that those pages and all records of the investigation should be made public. Mouton on Monday ruled just that.

                  The council’s decision came after a two-hour meeting, with the first hour involving a public debate over whether to go into closed session.

                  The meeting opened with the reading of the call to go into closed session. Glaze asked why it was necessary to go into closed session.

                  Head said of the reasons, “You’re talking about legal strategy, and you’re discussing the merits of a case that could potentially go to the Court of Appeals.” He said the council would hear from all three of its attorneys — Head, assistant city attorney Peter Edwards and outside counsel Karl Blanchard — who would advise the members as to what could happen if they went forward with the appeal and ramifications if they did not.

                  Scearce read a statement in which he said that despite his belief that the judge’s ruling is wrong, he would not vote to go into closed session and he would vote to release the records.

                  “I fear that by going into closed session, it will appear we having something to hide,” he said.

                  Glaze asked what would happen if the vote went in favor of holding an open session.

                  Head said: “It does serious damage to communication between your lawyers and this council. It puts the city at tremendous risk. It places the city treasury at risk.”

                  “By potential lawsuits?” Glaze asked. “Certainly,” responded Head.

                  The mayor outlined a proposal to go into closed session and then disclose any votes taken.

                  Blanchard, outside counsel for the city who represented the city in the case brought by the Globe seeking public disclosure of the documents, told the council that “I have this concern as your lawyer. That if you have an open session where you receive advice, you will have waived your attorney-client privilege perhaps and maybe certainly to all legal advice that you have received at any point in time on this issue.”

                  Seibert said it was his understanding that it was an all-or-nothing decision: If the council decided not to appeal, the city would have to release the Rohr report and everything else in the investigation. He asked if that was correct, and Head told him that was the case.

                  Golden said he did not want to go into closed session. “Every email I had today was asking for this report turned out. Every one,” he said. “And I had a substantial number of them.”

                  Woolston made a motion to go into closed session and report any votes taken immediately after the session instead of waiting the 72 hours allowed by law to disclose votes. The motion failed 3-6, with Glaze, Golden, Rosenberg, Scearce, Shaw and the mayor voting against it.

                  Shaw said he wanted to do what’s right for Joplin, and that he would prefer to go into closed session to listen to what the attorneys had to say. Shaw made a motion to go into closed session to hear the legal advice and then come back into open session to vote. The motion failed 4-5, with Glaze, Golden, Rosenberg, Scearce and Seibert voting against it.

                  Seibert asked again if the judge’s order was to release everything. Head said it was, but that there might be ways to release the report but also appeal.

                  Blanchard said the council could release the Rohr report and still preserve the right to appeal by redacting names from it “because I believe this decision is categorically wrong,” and that the report and testimony are personnel records about job performance.

                  Golden repeated assertions that the public wants all the documents released.

                  After debate about the options, Rosenberg made a motion to release the Rohr report with the names of employees blacked out, and to also release the transcripts of those who are not current employees.

                  Head told the council that the investigator had assured employees that their testimony was confidential.

                  “If you proceed to give up those, you are ensuring that you will never get an employee to give you truth about what’s going on — there will be a lot of people who don’t see anything — from now on,” Head said. “If you’re worried about corruption in government, if you’re worried about misdeeds, and if you’re worried about violations of policy, if you release these employees’ records you’re guaranteed that for a generation you will not get them.”

                  Head told the council that he could see there being potential lawsuits from employees if the records are released.

                  Shaw wanted to know more about the employees’ rights. Raney said it was not in the best interests of residents to open the city to the possibility of lawsuits.

                  After more discussion, the council voted 6-3 to go into closed session on a motion by Woolston to discuss the legal issues and then return to open session to vote. Raney seconded. Those who voted in favor were Woolston, Raney, Seibert, Shaw, Colbert-Kean and Rosenberg.

                  Meeting duration

                  THE JOPLIN COUNCIL met from 5:15 to 7:20 p.m. Thursday.


                  All the shit unfit to print

                  http://www.joplinglobe.com

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Globe wins city document fight, deliberately hid documents that made Mark Rohr look bad

                    Globe wins city document fight, deliberately hid documents that made Mark Rohr look bad


                    http://rturner229.blogspot.com/2014/...ent-fight.html
                    http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0437#post10437



                    .

                    When former Joplin City Manager Mark Rohr stood before the Joplin City Council recently, ripped the council members who fired him for their corruption, indicated that God would pay them back in the next life for voting against him, and decried the "good old boys" who were running the city government, the Joplin Globe knew this was not the first time he had publicly made such accusations against those who dared to stand against him.

                    The Globe had the information, but for some reason chose never to share it with its readers.

                    During the entire time the Joplin Globe has been fighting a successful battle to force the city to release documents related to Osage Beach lawyer Tom Loraine's ethics investigation, the newspaper has been sitting on documents that could have shed light on the problems that have been facing the city the past several months.

                    The Turner Report has learned that Globe Editor Carol Stark has possession of documents that show that former City Manager Mark Rohr ran into City Council efforts to fire him at nearly every one of his previous stops, that he was consistently accused of bullying, and that when city council members stood in his way, he defended himself by claiming he was fighting the good fight against the "good old boy network."

                    Globe sources indicate that the problem has been that Carol Stark has a tendency to get too close to administrators who make a show of taking her into their confidence, referring specifically to Rohr and Joplin R-8 Superintendent C. J. Huff. Information that could put any of her favorites into a bad light has a hard time finding its way into the newspaper and when it does, it is generally watered down.

                    The Globe had documents showing that Rohr almost immediately began having problems after he became city manager of Punta Gorda, Florida. Minutes of a Punta Gorda council meeting show City Councilman John Errett saying he "could not recall when he has been more convinced that a mistake was made in the selection of a city manager." Errett referred to Rohr as a "draconian, dogmatic dictator."

                    Errett and another councilman attempted to have him fired, but withdrew the motion after providing Rohr with some suggestions on ways to improve his personal relations with employees, including controlling his temper.

                    A second effort to fire Rohr in Punta Gorda also fell short.

                    In a newspaper interview that the Globe also had access to, former Punta Gorda City Councilman Bruce Thompson said, "I think he was one of the worst city managers we ever had. It goes to his style of operation. He doesn't want anyone to tell him what to do. He doesn't like anybody to challenge his authority. I worked in public life all my life. You don't treat employees as harshly and nastily as he did.

                    Rohr left Punta Gordon in 1998, telling a newspaper he had found "fraud" and "corruption" in the city. Efforts to get rid of him were "purely political," he said, "because I was taking on the good-old-boy network."

                    Newspaper reports from Rohr's time in Newton Falls, Ohio, show that he fought with the mayor and a former city councilman. Rohr charged them with corruption, the same charge he leveled at Joplin council members. Just like in Joplin, Rohr never came through with any evidence that any corruption was taking place. The Globe was aware of the Newton Falls, Ohio, information, information that could have shined a different light on the Mark Rohr controversy, but sat on the information.

                    The Newton Falls newspaper said the feud began when the former city councilman was looking into complaints from department heads that they were being mistreated by Rohr. The complaints were similar to ones that were heard in Joplin. The Globe had this information.

                    When Rohr left Newton Falls to take another job, he left a divided city, with petitions supporting him circulating around the city, just like in Joplin.

                    In the last job Rohr had before coming to Joplin, in Piqua, Ohio, Rohr's first years went smoothly, until people were elected to the City Council with the specific purpose of getting rid of Rohr, who was accused of overspending and mistreating employees.

                    The documents that were in the possession of the Joplin Globe and Editor Carol Stark have already been used by the Globe...in 2004 when Andy Ostmeyer, who still works for the newspaper, did a thorough and well-written investigation of the man who was about to become Joplin's city manager.

                    At that time, Mark Rohr's background was news.

                    That was before he became Carol Stark's friend.

                    .

                    Posted by Randy at 8:53 PM THURSDAY, APRIL 03, 2014


                    ___666___666___666___



                    The Turner Diaries RULES, The Turner Report drools

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Rohr manipulated council factions, investigator contends

                      Rohr manipulated council factions, investigator contends

                      By Debby Woodin
                      news@joplinglobe.com
                      April 5, 2014



                      http://www.joplinglobe.com/topstorie...gator-contends
                      http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0443#post10443


                      JOPLIN, Mo. — Mark Rohr is center stage in an investigator’s report that describes Rohr as a vindictive manager who could not get along with department heads and pushed his wife around at City Hall.

                      City administrators on Friday afternoon released full copies of the report and its supporting documents by special investigator Thomas Loraine, an Osage Beach attorney.

                      The investigation assigned by the council was intended to focus on the conduct of Councilmen Bill Scearce and Mike Woolston, and to determine how a note regarding Scearce was removed from Rohr’s desk.

                      Rohr on Friday called allegations that he screamed at and shook his wife in City Hall as “pure fiction. That did not happen.”

                      Loraine contended that incident, described by Jack Schaller, a former public works employee who resigned after part of the council made a failed bid in August to fire Rohr, lends credibility to a 911 call for a domestic disturbance at the Rohr home. Loraine included an audio copy of the call as well as the testimony of former Police Chief Lane Roberts, who said that no charges were pressed against Rohr because the family recanted the information given in the call. He made no mention in the report of Rohr’s explanations.

                      Rohr said Schaller resented him for not promoting Schaller’s wife to direct human resources.

                      “It is hard to tell which is more flawed, the Loraine report or the process the city followed” in conducting the investigation, Rohr said.

                      Loraine questioned Rohr about the disappearance of the sticky note that had details of Scearce’s former involvement with a convicted bookmaker. Rohr tells Loraine he received information about it from the police chief. Loraine repeatedly asked Rohr to disclose details Rohr did not want to disclose, saying he did not want to violate a law by disclosing investigatory information the chief had given him to protect city interests.

                      “I would love to tell you, but I just don’t want to get myself in trouble by doing so,” Rohr told Loraine. Loraine pressed him on the details of the meaning of the words in the sticky note.

                      “I’d like to get some professional counsel before I do so. And I’m a little troubled because to me, the issue is how did the note get removed, not what’s in the note,” Rohr said.

                      Loraine reads Rohr the assignment from the council for the investigation and said it involved the nature of the note. Rohr disagreed. “I remember the council meeting, it was the nature of the circumstances of the disappearance of the Post-It note,” Rohr told him.

                      Loraine told Rohr: “I’m going to tell everybody how that happened at the end of this investigation, but one of the things I need to do is I need to have answers to the questions. If everybody came in here and said what you said, I wouldn’t be able to tell anybody anything.”

                      The report pins some of the council’s disharmony on Rohr. “It became evident to this investigator from the testimony fairly quickly that the council was divided into two camps, and that City Manager Rohr manipulated this problem and encouraged the state of division in the council,” the report reads.

                      “I didn’t ‘manipulate and encourage’ this divide,” Rohr wrote in an email to the Globe on Friday. “It made my job and my life much more difficult. I did not create it as Mr. (Richard) Russell indicates. It was created by the majority bloc meeting and plotting and implementing the installation of the mayor in early 2012.”

                      Loraine’s report says there was a chasm between City Attorney Brian Head and Rohr that impeded city work and fueled the council’s divisive feud, illustrated by the council’s split 5-4 vote to fire Rohr after the Feb. 4 report was disclosed.

                      Head had made complaints to the council that he was being excluded from contract talks early on with the Wallace Bajjali Development Partners, the firm that became the city’s contracted master developer after the tornado. Head said Rohr shouted at him for going to the council about the issue during a meeting involving Wallace Bajjali staff. He also said Rohr did not know how to work with the city’s licensed professionals and did not allow them to have much input into the crucial early stages of project planning.

                      Replied Rohr: “Mr. Head expressed dissatisfaction early on about his not being involved in nonlegal decisions as apparently he was allowed to participate in by the past city manager.” Rohr said he and other department heads saw Head as “an impediment” who did not get his work done.

                      “I constantly received complaints from other department heads about him not doing work they needed. He has a poor work ethic and is constantly off work for a variety of aches and ailments.”

                      Head also testified that Rohr accused him of operating a “shadow government” during one of the city’s ice storms. He said Rohr had sent out an email on how city staff should respond to residents in need of help and Head sent out an email saying city employees also had been victims of the storm.

                      Former director of public works, David Hertzberg, who was demoted last year as the result of a discovery that uncollected department fees amounted to $150,000, told the investigator that the reason cited for his demotion was missing tires in the city garage and billing problems in the code division. Hertzberg didn’t agree with the way he was demoted, though he thinks a boss should be able to pick his own team. But, he didn’t like his name associated with thievery in the process. Hertzberg said Rohr did not want constructive criticism.

                      Rohr said Hertzberg was not well-equipped to be a department manager.

                      Councilman Scearce and council candidate Jim West told the investigator that Goodyear lost city business in tires and tire alignments after the tornado because Rohr directed city staff to stop using the business. Rohr said Goodyear would not fix his tires, which were damaged when he was driving after the tornado.

                      The investigator concluded that meant that Rohr did not permit competitive bidding for city services.

                      “It had to do with the guy not helping us during the tornado,” Rohr said, because he was trying to drive from point to point for meetings related to rescue and recovery when he stopped at Goodyear and asked if his tires could be fixed quickly, but was told he had to wait in line.

                      “I asked city staff if we had a contract with anyone else and was assured we did,” Rohr said. “I am quite comfortable with that decision and it had nothing to do with a bid.”

                      Staff writer Susan Redden contributed to this report.

                      911 report

                      Investigator Loraine’s billings showed that he focused on Rohr’s 911 report in the first days of the investigation, though that was not part of the charge given to him by the council to investigate.


                      All the shit unfit to print

                      http://www.joplinglobe.com

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        From October 2004 -- The Joplin Globe's investigation of Mark Rohr

                        From October 2004 -- The Joplin Globe's investigation of Mark Rohr


                        http://rturner229.blogspot.com/2014/...in-globes.html
                        http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0444#post10444



                        .


                        In a short time, if it has not done so already, the Joplin Globe will post either articles about the release of the full ethics investigation that led to the firing of former city manager Mark Rohr, the complete report itself, or a combination of the two.

                        KOAM led its 5 p.m. newscast with the revelation that the report contains testimony from current and former city employees about Rohr's intimidating behavior.

                        That should come as no surprise to the Joplin Globe since it reported on Rohr's long history of that kind of behavior in its October 10, 2004, edition, an investigation that took up a large part of page one and nearly all of an inside page. The report, done by the Globe's award-winning reporter Andy Ostmeyer was complete and was thoroughly documented. It could have served as a blueprint for what has happened to Mark Rohr and the City of Joplin.

                        As I noted in a post last night, the Globe had all of this information at its disposal, information that would have provided its readers with a better understanding of the events that have had the city in turmoil for the past several months.

                        Instead, it sat on the documents.

                        I have been perplexed today by the number of comments that the Globe did not sit on the documents because it printed them 10 years ago. That may make sense to those who said it, but it certainly makes no sense to me. Many Joplin residents did not live here in October 2004 and many others did not read that particular investigation. Another commenter noted that the article is available on the Globe's website. That is true, but how was anyone supposed to know enough to be looking for it.

                        A reader contacted me about the article and mailed it to me a couple of days ago. As I looked over the articles, I could remember reading them, but as I read them, I was amazed at how accurately they predicted what is going on in Joplin now. Accusations of intimidation and brutality, abuse of city employees, Rohr accusing those who oppose him of being corrupt, but not providing any information to back it up, even the reference to those who oppose him as being part of a "good-old-boy network.

                        All of this was pertinent. Whether to include it or not was a decision that was made in the Joplin Globe newsroom. That in itself, is a major part of this ongoing story.

                        I await your comments.

                        .

                        Posted by Randy at 3:52 PM Friday, April 4, 2014


                        ___666___666___666___



                        The Turner Diaries RULES, The Turner Report drools

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Carol Stark: Something's wrong when public becomes 'opponent'

                          Carol Stark: Something's wrong when public becomes 'opponent'

                          By Carol Stark
                          news@joplinglobe.com
                          April 5, 2014



                          http://www.joplinglobe.com/editorial...comes-opponent
                          http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0446#post10446

                          JOPLIN, Mo. — Members of the Joplin City Council met Thursday night with their legal counsel to decide if it would appeal a decision by a circuit court judge ordering the full release of an investigator’s report and related transcripts and documents.

                          The judgment had come down Monday in The Joplin Globe’s lawsuit seeking records that had been held in secret by the city since a Feb. 4 closed door meeting which resulted in the firing of City Manager Mark Rohr.

                          The City Council, on Thursday, was trying to decide whether it should make the decision in an open session or claim the litigation exemption and go behind closed doors to hash out whether it would appeal.

                          One of the attorneys in the room told the council he could not be “candid” with them in open session and then looked pointedly at our reporter Debby Woodin, who was there to cover the council’s decision. After all, she worked for the “opponent.”

                          I wondered if he, as well as members of the council, had stopped to consider that the “opponent” in this case was not the Globe or Debby but rather the thousands and thousands of people who live in Joplin. They are the taxpayers who foot the salaries of city workers and who got stuck with an $80,000 plus bill for an investigation they had barely seen. They will also pay the bill of the outside counsel the city hired. So when we filed the lawsuit against the City of Joplin, it certainly wasn’t for ourselves but on behalf of the public as a whole.

                          The council, in a 6-3 decision, chose not to appeal on Thursday. And I applaud them for making the decision known immediately and then ordering the release of all the documents by the end of the day on Friday.

                          That’s why you can go to www.joplinglobe.com and read the full 62 pages of investigator Tom Loraine’s report about the ethics of two council members and a missing sticky note — the original three charges presented to Loraine. And there, you will find transcripts of interviews taken by Loraine.

                          On Monday, we will add the documents that Loraine used when he made his recommendations to the council. What you read is exactly what was released by the city. The documents belong to the public — a judge ordered it so — and it is not our place to edit or release them selectively. That’s what we were fighting in the first place.

                          The real irony is that in trying to get documents released on behalf of the public, it ends up costing taxpayers.

                          It shouldn’t have to be that way.

                          Before we hired Joplin attorney Charles Buchanan to represent us in court, we spent a lot of time talking with Jean Maneke, an attorney for Missouri Press Association members. It was during those conversations that we had hoped to avoid the suit.

                          Maneke works with a lot of reporters and editors. But she also works very hard trying to interpret Missouri’s open-meetings and open-records laws for government bodies making efforts to interpret the Sunshine Law.

                          “Frequently, through informal discussions we are are able to resolve any confusion about the law,” Maneke told me.

                          There are plenty of online resources available, and the attorney general’s website has Sunshine Law interpretation.

                          But at some point, when a public body digs its heels in, then there’s the courtroom — the place of last resort.

                          Many states have created an Office of Public Counsel related to the Sunshine Law. The platform uses a mediator for the public and takes away the prohibitive cost of a lawsuit. Maneke believes it would be a good thing for Missouri.

                          I do too, if it would help keep more government meetings open and more public officials concerned about their responsibility to those they serve.

                          But I also think the law is very clear. Council members, school board members, county commissioners and other govening boards should consider who they work for and put information into the hands of those they serve. Open-meeting exemptions should be used sparingly and with the broadest of interpretation. And those who create meeting agendas should immediately stop listing what I call “placeholder” closed session notices at the bottom of the agenda.

                          Ask your elected officials why they are shutting you out. If they see you as the “opponent,” maybe you need new representation.


                          Carol Stark is editor of The Joplin Globe. Address correspondence to her, c/o The Joplin Globe, P.O. Box 7, Joplin, MO 64802 or email cstark@joplinglobe.com.


                          All the shit unfit to print

                          http://www.joplinglobe.com

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Carol Stark lectures about open government, but bars public from school board forum

                            Carol Stark lectures about open government, but bars public from school board forum


                            http://rturner229.blogspot.com/2014/...bout-open.html
                            http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0451#post10451



                            .

                            In the second day of its release of documents from the Loraine investigation, the Joplin Globe followed the same pattern it established in the first.

                            The Globe printed three articles and a self-congratulatory column by Editor Carol Stark in today's edition.

                            One article centered on Loraine's contention that Rohr was crossing the line and usurping power that should belong to the City Council. Another concentrated on the testimony of city council members.

                            The third article was a full page devoted to Joplin contractor Charles Kuehn, who refused to answer Loraine's questions, but apparently was happy to sit still for friendlier questions from the Globe. The article seemed designed to give Mike Woolston a boost right before the election, especially since the Globe has yet to bring in the testimony of people interviewed by Loraine who did not make the city councilman out to be squeaky clean.

                            It was Carol Stark's preachy column on the opinion page that should leave people grumbling. We absolutely appreciate the fact that the Globe went to court to get these documents opened, even though it doesn't appear they plan to do much with them, other than to steer readers to their website. Perhaps not even that, since many readers have cut the website off since the five-article limit was implemented.

                            Mrs. Stark concluded her column by writing, "Ask your elected officials why they are shutting you out. If they see you as the "opponent," maybe you need new representation.

                            What a fine, noble message coming from someone who deliberately barred the public from attending the March 24 Joplin R-8 Board of Education candidate forum.

                            What is it they say about glass houses?

                            .

                            Posted by Randy at 12:47 PM Sunday, April 6, 2014


                            ___666___666___666___



                            The Turner Diaries RULES, The Turner Report drools

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...0457#post10457
                              You Nazis may be insane . . . .
                              . . . . but us whiggers are typpycull!!!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                http://www.whitenationalist.org/foru...0466#post10466
                                All the shit unfit to print

                                http://www.joplinglobe.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X