"Ms. Furth arrived at exonerating conclusions in recent investigations of three council members: Charles Marsala on an ethical question, Jerry Carlson on a parliamentary procedure matter, and Elizabeth Lewis on a building permit dust-up.

None of those council members criticized Ms. Furth at the meeting."

This is exactly the conflict of interest and impropriety that I referred to in my statement read by Mr. Buckheit. It permeates our local government on almost every level, with few exceptions. And Ms. Furth, FYI, the Town of Atherton Building Department is part of the Town of Atherton, your client. And our correspondence clearly indicates that you are representing and "defending" the Building Department and, in particular, Mike Wasmann, the Building Official.

There are three existing or pending lawsuits with Atherton being named or about to be named the defendant.

One involves a civil rights violation by the Police Department, the other a disregard of the building code by the very department that is supposed to enforce the code, (the Building Department of course). The third lawsuit is one alleging improprieties in the Building Department's fee collection practices.

All three of these issues were simmering when I worked as Atherton's Finance Director. All three of these problems I tried in a small way to help fix.

Now, three years later, the chickens have come home to roost. The Town is spending $400,000 to $600,000 on legal fees. Wynn Furth is profiting handsomely while the Town's financial condition deteriorates. While those who depend upon the Town for essential serivces are left holding the bag.

Wynn Furth tried to secure her own future with the town by going out of her way to exonerate two councilmember on conflict of interest charges (Marsala and Carlson) while giving a free pass to Ms. Elizabeth Lewis on egregioius violations of the Town's zoning ordinance. As one resident said Ms. Furth can do one thing very well, she can count to three.

Is Ms. Furth guilty of a conflict of interest? I would argue that she is. Rather than hold her masters accountable for their lack of respect for the rule of law, she acted as their apologist, their enabler. By doing so, she has subjected Atherton to even greater exposure to litigation, very expensive and unpredictable litigation.

Atherton's legal problems will end when the City Council learns that it must play by the rules and when it takes responsibility for its prior misconduct.

Until it gets a City Attorney who has integrity, who plays by the book, and who has the courage to remind the Council of its fiduciary obligation to the community, the Town will continue to wallow in a legal quagmire.

It is indeed quite telling that Mr. Johns flagged some of the major problem areas in the town before they spiralled out of control. The town's solution was to get rid of him instead of fix the problems. Clearly the town made a major mistake.