The $10 million lawsuit pending in federal court mentioned in this post will very likely be the last tort claim the Town will have to respond to. That\'s because when this case is adjudicated, there won\'t be a Town of Atherton anymore. The Town will have gone bankrupt.

Unlike the lawsuit most recently settled, the one where the former Finance Director let the town off the hook with backpay and a letter of commendation, this lawsuit is the fault of the current administration and the current City Council. As such Furth, Gruber, and Carlson should all be held accountable for allowing this case to progress, rather than agreeing to settle with the plaintiff on reasonable terms.

A lowball offer of just $25k is by no means a reasonable offer.

The Town has a choice, it can share the fate of Vallejo and Half Moon Bay, or it can deal with its problems here and now.

The Town picked on the wrong city slicker when it picked on Buckheit. He has money, brains and a world class attorney working on his side, not to mention the facts and the law.

As a homeowner and long time resident, I am very worried about this case.

This post is informative. But it should have been posted on the "Police Outsourcing" thread. All three of these lawsuits are directly related to the conduct of the police department and police officers. The settlement costs should be factored into the yearly per capita cost of the police department, in addition to the outsized salaries and pensions to determine a correct outsourcing decision.

Police Outsourcing is right. Buckley was a police officer who used Henderson to amp up her sexual harassment lawsuit against the Town, Johns was the subject of a false hostile work environment complaint by former Chief Bob Brennan and Buchkeit had a police report falsified.

The legal bills and settlements have been charged to the City Attorney. These costs should be charged against the PD so that the real costs of running the department are known.

The gentleman prosecuting that $10 million federal civil rights lawsuit has a history of making very good investments and very good business decisions. However the thing that should be most alarming about this case is that he is not in it so much for the money, he is in it because he believes in holding people accountable, especially when they abuse thier power.

By the time the Town figures out it needs to settle the case, it may very well be too late.

Mr. Cordova:

You are spot on. There are corrupt and incompetent people in the town that want to keep their heads buried in the sand and/or they are afraid that dealing with Mr. Buckheit will bring to light their corruption and incompetence. As long as those people are in control this law suit will not settle and the town could very well end up in bankruptcy.

Too many citizens of the town would also rather bury their heads in the sand, prefering to consider Mr. Buckheit a "pariah" because they don't want to take the necessary action to rid their town of the corrupt and incompetent people running it. If they don't do something about it soon they will find themselves eventually forced to pull their heads out to see the disaster that their inaction has helped create.

It's sad given the huge potential of the talented people living in the town.

Brennan and Nielsen are gone. There is a new Chief of Police, the firt honest one in a decade and a half.

There is an administratie investigation going on over the former finance director's false arrest and evidence tampering. At least one cop is likely to be disciplined as result.

In two months there will be a new city council. In all probability, the City Manager and the City Attorney will be given their walking papers.

These have been dark days for Atherton. However, because of people like Johns and Buckheit who helped to break down the walls of denial, Atherton's worst days are behind it.

Isn't AIG the insurance company bailed out by the Federal Reserve Bank? Too big to fail??

It appears the Town of Atherton is covered by AIG. I don't see a deductible (pg 56): Web Link

The policy costs $215 / parcel. If Atherton loses the $10 million suit, it will cost residents about the same as the John's settlement.

Ooops .. looks like the last letter was cut off in the link address.

Here it is again:

Web Link

No insurance policy covers acts that were intentional. This insurance policy will not and does not cover intentional acts nor any punitive damages that may become assessed against the Town of Atherton police officers. Can punitive damages be assessed for intentional wrongful acts? A police officer admitted in court that the report was falsified. Just something to think about.

Atherton's general liability loss run report will tell you what ABAG thinks this claim is worth.

Atherton officials should be EXTREMELY concerned about these pending lawsuits.

A jury may be shocked about Mr. Buckheit false arrest, the police's subsequent refusal to provide him with the police report, the falsification admission and the judge's factual innocence finding. Fact patterns just don't get much better than that for a plaintiff.

By the time this finds its way to a jury, Ms. Furth will be long gone as will some of this drama's principal actors on the Town Council.

Those cautions about Half Moon Bay and Vallejo are not misplaced. In this case, I see a very large parcel tax in Atherton's future... something they will deserve for electing ethically-challenged officials and tolerating inept management - both of which continue to this day.

Offer him $1 million, an apology and a promise never to do it again. Hope that is enough.

Don't forget to identify and prosecute the Police Officer who committed a felony against him.

Good point Mr. Stogner
and the best possible way to insure that it won't happen again
This would be the only way to insure that there has been some actual benefit to the public in general out of all of this. The public is very much a party in this matter as it is their money spent on the mismanagement of public affairs.

Put the officers involved in a room. Tell them REACt has their computers. Tell them if somebody doesn't confess REACT will come up with the incriminating evidence, evidence or no evidence.

Blaming the people of Atherton for electing "The Bad Bunch" that presently runs our town is misplacing the actual fault. The villains named "Special Interest" and "Apathy" should be strung up. If a list were pulled out showing which residents did not vote and who campaigned for the present faulty incumbents, you'd have the group that should pay the restorations. There is a solid core of Atherton voters who consistently vote against the poor candidates and support the good ideas. There need to be more of us. It is unfair to include us among those deemed responsible for this present mess. These "messes" (absurd lawsuits, lies and illegal fund manipulations at city hall) stretch back for over a dozen years or so. This is not new stuff, it's just getting worse. Only once in recent history did the majority of Athertonians actually get fed up enough to come out and vote down a parcel tax. We need that kind of spirit to return and stay alert. Let's have a Candidates Forum where we can ask the tough questions and hear them struggle to answer. It's time in Atherton to end the tyranny at taxpayer expense. For those who haven't bothered to vote and those who were bought by the villains at headquarters, listen up. The former are already tabulated. We'll find the rest of you and your wallet next.

Not Me states:"Let's have a Candidates Forum where we can ask the tough questions and hear them struggle to answer."

ACIL and the League of Women Voters will hold a Forum at 7 PM on 30 September at the Pavilion at Holbrook- Palmer Park for the four candidates who are running for three Town Council seats. Each candidate has been asked to submit in advance a 500 word candidate’s statement and answers to a number of specific questions. These positions statements and answers will be posted in advance of the forum on the web and will also be distributed to attendees at the forum.
During the forum each candidate will be given the opportunity to make an opening statement and then respond after all four opening statements have been completed. Following these statements questions which have been submitted by the attendees will be consolidated and asked of the candidate by ACIL Board member John Davey who will chair the forum.

POGO you are dead wrong. Buckheit only got his "factual innocence" because he bought it. His lawyer's father was a top judge in that courthouse for many years and knows all the judges there. I heard he was friends with the judge who granted the "factual innocence". This is why it was granted. Money and power. Fortunately this will not be the case in the federal courthouse.

Are you going to support a lawsuit every time the police arrest someone? We would go bankrupt pretty quickly that way. We need to stand behind and support our police officers. This is what the Town of Atherton is doing despite the best efforts of Mayor McKeithen, another disgruntled person just like Buckheit.

Support Law Enforcement -

I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who supports law enforcement more than me.

You cavalierly dismiss Mr. Buckheit's exoneration, ignoring the fact that the Atherton police officer ADMITTED UNDER OATH that the official police report had been altered and was false. Smearing the judge is pathetic. Those connections that you attribute to Mr. Buckheit didn't prevent him from being arrested, handcuffed and jailed, did it?

Atherton should clearly fear federal court because it one place where local politics and biases don't seem to count very much. Federal judges have traditionally shown a very low tolerance for police games (have you been paying attention to the recent problems in San Francisco?) and the Northern California district leads the pack. So let's see who's right when this case comes to trial. No, Mr. Buckheit would be foolish to settle this case. As I said before, this fact pattern is as good as it gets for a plaintiff.

By now, you would think Atherton's elected officials would know that there is nothing to be gained by underestimating the severity of these issues.

Support Law Enforcement:

I am ex-law enforcement and you are dead wrong. When an officer testifies in open court, under oath that a report was falsified and nothing is done about it, you have BIG problems in that police department. I can tell you that had that happened in the department I came from, the testifying officer would be in Internal Affairs before he could turn around. The incident would have been fully investigated and the findings made known to the victim of such an outrageous breach of trust. In addition, if the perpetrator was found the DA would have surely prosecuted (so you can guess my department wasn't in San Maeo County).

Dear Support Law Enforcement,

I Michael G. Stogner Support Law Enforcement, that is a FACT.

I do not support Law Enforcement Officer's committing Felonies PERIOD.

I would have been delighted to learn of the unpublicized "Atherton Candidates Forum" on September 30th were it not being held in the wimpy, ineffective way that it is, judging by what you've written about the format. A 500-word statement by each candidate? How will that differ from the carefully constructed advertisments we've already received from these guys? And questions decided upon in advance by some unidentified crew? Oh dear! I can just imagine how bland and meaningless those "selected" questions will be, especially considering the two groups who are sponsoring this event. Are these candidates not capable of answering, spontaneously, questions from the audience? Initially, I wondered why this event has not been publicized to residents but now, seeing this protective format, I see why. Who would bother to attend an event that is so canned and clearly protects the candidates from having to answer anything they might not want to? If these candidates were truly interested in actually letting the public know what they believe and how they stand on the important issues, they'd be brave enough to hold some individual "coffees" around town where voters can talk to them one-on-one. And these events would be publicized so all concerned voters could attend. Mailing a postcard or posting on The Almanac Online are good ways to notify residents who care about local politics. Honesty by candidates is refreshing but we'll not see it at this forum where the biased sponsors are obviously more concerned about hiding anything that might be considered controversial. No wonder Atherton is in the sorry state that it is!

Not Me - the Candidates Forum was announced in the Town Forum on August 12th - more than 45 days in advance.

The format includes some very difficult questions which have to be answered by the candidates in advance:
"Written statement to be submitted one week prior to the Forum evening: A 500 word or less statement of purpose:

"Why are you running and what do you intend to accomplish during your term? What are the top 3 things in our town that you want to change or improve?

Second, please also respond in writing to the following questions. These are ideological and behavioral. Substantive questions will be posed at the Forum.

"1 - Are you committed to open and transparent government and pledge not to use closed sessions except when absolutely necessary (as opposed to using closed sessions whenever permitted)? Under what circumstances might exceptions have to be made?

2 - Are you independent as demonstrated by neither seeking nor accepting support from anyone who is not a registered voter in the town of Atherton, which means accepting neither money or endorsements from unions, developers, business organizations or civic groups? If not, from which organizations or groups will you be seeking support?

3 - Are you committed to acting in the best interest of the citizens of Atherton rather than to further your own agenda or the agenda of some outside group? Are there any areas of potential interest to the town where you might have a conflict of interest?

4 - Are you committed to working with your fellow council members to find the best solutions for Atherton residents and for working out differences productively without personal attacks or animosity?

5 - Are you committed to having a balanced budget without recourse to reserves or accounting tricks?

6 - In order to bring the budget into balance and keeping it there, are you open to considering any and all opportunities for significant costs savings such as: restructuring town functions, outsourcing of specific services, reconsidering town employee pay and benefits/pension agreements?"

I certainly don't detect any 'hiding' in these questions and I am unaware of any bias by either the ACIL or the League of Women Voters.

In addition the candidates will be asked question posed by the audience. There is no need for five consecutive members of the audience to ask the same question if their questions can simply be combined.

Now that you have had your opportunity to bitch based on your ignorance of these facts, why don't YOU hold your own forum and do it your way? Just exactly what would be your way?

Nice "fair and balanced" questions there, Pete, especially #6.
You're just another "holier-than-thou" politican in "concerned citizen" clothes.

Just Wandering states:"Nice "fair and balanced" questions"

Thank you, I thought that these questions were much better than either yours or Not Me's questions. Perhaps the two of you can organize a candidates forum of your own to provide concerned citizens with a choice of questions, venues and format.

Buckheit didn't buy his declaration of factual innocence.
Buckheit's lawer doesn't win cases because of his father.

This is all smear motivated by fear.

Guys like that Atherton detective who got bounced from REACT are sweating bullets right now, as they should be. There is a saying, what goes around comes around.

I am stunned at the above attacks on Peter for his efforts to provide a useful candidates forum to benefit the public's understanding.
Unless you're going to call them all up yourself to find out what they think in a privet conversation, or you are confident that the press will produce very direct and detailed interviews in print--then the ACIL forum will be everyones best shot at sizing up potential representatives by creating there own questions.
And why is "Not Me" so bent out of shape by #6 ? I don't get it. Is this poster an employee who wants to continue to be overpaid? If this the case they won't have a vote to cast here anyway.

Not me and Just wondering -

Here's an idea - why don't you attend the candidate's forum and ask your own questions?

To do so, you will actually have to get out of your chair and go to Holbrook-Palmer that evening. It's called "making an effort."

Try it. You are more than welcome to attend and participate.

Of course, it might be easier for you to belly ache about it afterward...

One of the reasons that Atherton has so many lawsuits is that they simply do not pay attention to the law. Tonight's closed session discussion on HSR is a perfect example. Here is my email to the Council:

Dear Town Council,

I note the following Closed Session agenda topic:

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (Subsection (a) of Government Code Section 54956):

Atherton et al v. High-Speed Rail Authority Case No. 34-2008-80000022


I would like to refresh your memories regarding the underlying principle of the Brown Act:

“In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards, and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.”

“The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good or the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.”

The Attorney General has stated:

"Since closed sessions are an exception to open meeting requirements, the authority for such sessions has been narrowly construed. The law evinces a strong bias in favor of open meetings, and court decisions and opinions of this office have buttressed that legislative intent."

"The codified pending litigation exception relating to local bodies is contained in section 54956.9. This section authorizes bodies to conduct closed sessions with their legal counsel to discuss pending litigation when discussion in open session would prejudice the agency in that litigation."

I cannot imagine what element of this litigation is so sensitive that it cannot be discussed in Open Session. This agenda item involves existing litigation about which there has been extensive public disclosure and discussion and on an issue, HSR, which is of significant importance to our community In addition, there are numerous individuals in our community who have considerable expertise on the matter and whose input could be quite useful in your deliberations. Finally, the expense of this litigation will be borne by the citizens and we deserve to be fully informed as to the value of such expenditure.

Under these circumstances, I believe that your use of the litigation exemption in the Brown Act to discuss this matter in closed session is unwise and is an insult to the public whom you serve.

Peter Carpenter

*************

Operating in secret creates distrust and, over time, insulates elected officials from the citizens whom they serve - to everyone's detriment.