[Vision2020] UI Settles With Ex-Workers
lfalen
lfalen at turbonet.com
Mon Nov 2 10:58:08 PST 2009
Good post Wayne. Almost everything dealing with public institutions should be available to the public. The problem with the public records law is that if they chose to ignore a request the only option is to go to the district court. If one does not have the money to take the case to the district court you are out of luck. This is why I would like to see inforcement of the public records law be the Attorney General's office as is the case with the open meetings law.
Roger
PS
I personally think that ther is still a lot about the CAMBER mess that the public does not know and probably never will.
-----Original message-----
From: "Art Deco" deco at moscow.com
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:13:17 -0700
To: "Vision 2020" vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] UI Settles With Ex-Workers
> Sunil,
>
> I'm sorry, but I don't buy that argument.
>
> The more light that is shone on misconduct in public institutions, and the more light that is shone on its costs, the better in my opinion. Public institutions sometimes bow to public opinion, especially in cases where revealed misconduct is habitual. They ignore public opinion at their peril in the legislature.
>
> The effect on non-public institutions on sealing cases is irrelevant since it is extremely doubtful that legislation prohibiting the sealing of those cases or parts thereof (with one exception) would ever pass. The exception is where cases are brought in the public interest. It may be possible to legislatively prohibit the sealing of anything in those cases.
>
> Please do not take this personally, but attorneys often advise their clients to keep settlements private. This is generally because the defendant claims they won't settle if the settlement is to become public. I think that this is a bluff in many cases. The defendants rely on attorney practices which are designed to wear down and to put extreme pressure on plaintiff resources, especially in the cases a small plaintiff and a large, rich corporation or person defendant. Attorneys sometimes also agree to seal cases so that the amount of attorney fees assessed remains private (this works unless, of course, the media attends the hearings on costs and attorney fees -- this attendance doesn't happen in Latah County).
>
> I also think that rules or legislation ought be passed greatly limiting what can be sealed in any part of a case, including discovery, especially in criminal cases. Judge Stegner sealed a lot of material in the Sitler (who had many victims) child sexual abuse case regarding Sitler's potential to reoffend. I read some of those documents before they were sealed. In my opinion those documents should be open to the public so that they can form an opinion about what a threat Sitler is, and will probably be all his life.
>
> Sealing documents in any case also prevents the public from assessing the integrity, fairness, competence, diligence, and work ethic of the judge, and in the case of criminal matters, the prosecuting attorney.
>
> In the Sitler case documents about Sitler's sexual proclivities and potential to reoffend were sealed without objection/protest from the prosecutor. After seeing Judge Stegner's conduct in the Sitler case and one other case, my confidence in his diligence, fairness, and competence really plummeted. I have an even lower opinion of the county prosecutor which I have expressed here and elsewhere. Among many of my informed friends and some law enforcement officials I have talked to, there is no disagreement about the latter.
>
> Wayne A. Fox
> 1009 Karen Lane
> PO Box 9421
> Moscow, ID 83843
>
> waf at moscow.com
> 208 882-7975
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sunil Ramalingam
> To: vision 2020
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 2:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] UI Settles With Ex-Workers
>
>
> Wayne,
>
> I think that rather than reducing the possibility of misconduct in the future, your approach is more likely to make settlements difficult. Do you really think that people are deterred by publicity attendant to the misdeeds of others? The more time goes by, the less likely I think this is.
>
> People act badly for a variety of reasons. Often they don't put much thought into the possible consequences of their actions. If they do, they convince themselves that they won't get caught.
>
> If forced to publicize all the details, then large organizations are likely going to make more attempts to keep embarassing details quiet. It's always easier for large organizations, whether public or private, to drag things out, than it is for those opposing them to keep going.
>
> Sunil
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: deco at moscow.com
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:05:28 -0700
> CC: president at uidaho.edu; GSCHROED at senate.idaho.gov
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] UI Settles With Ex-Workers
>
>
> What we need is legislation that prevents court settlements in cases like this where one party is a public agency from being sealed. It's taxpayers money. We should know how much, and how it is being spent, and the frivolities that led to such expenditures.
>
> In this case, it was obvious from the beginning that certain assholes at the university were being just that: assholes protecting a good ol' boy, Gary Maki.
>
> I want to know how much this malfeasance cost: the settlement amount, attorney fees, cost of UI staff time, etc. It's our money, and it is chickenshit of the UI, a public agency, to insist as part of the settlement that its terms be kept secret, and away from the taxpayer's eyes.
>
> If the cost of enough of these settlements were made public, maybe, just maybe, arrogant, good ol' boy/girl behavior could be slowed a bit, and maybe its worst practitioners dismissed from employment.
>
> What is also heartbreaking about this case in the current fiscal downturn is that the money spent on this utter fiasco of illicit favoritism could have been used to save some UI jobs, the services they provide, and prevented the misery and disorganization to families that would have not suffered if UI officials had acted correctly in the first place.
>
>
> Wayne A. Fox
> 1009 Karen Lane
> PO Box 9421
> Moscow, ID 83843
>
> waf at moscow.com
> 208 882-7975
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tom Hansen
> To: Moscow Vision 2020
> Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 5:57 AM
> Subject: [Vision2020] UI Settles With Ex-Workers
>
>
> Courtesy of today's (October 30, 2009) Spokesman Review.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> UI settles with ex-workers
> Husband, wife claimed they were punished for reporting on researcher
>
> The University of Idaho has settled a lawsuit with two former employees
> who claimed they were punished for reporting concerns that a high-profile
> researcher was using university resources to benefit private companies.
>
> Although the university is publicly funded, the terms of the settlement
> were being kept confidential.
>
> The UI released a statement saying Kenneth Hass and his wife, Martha Hass,
> "adhered to and followed" the proper procedures in reporting their
> concerns. The statement also said allegations that Kenneth Hass attempted
> to sabotage sensitive research projects were "unfounded."
>
> The couple worked at the UI's Center for Advanced Microelectronics and
> Biomolecular Research in Post Falls, a research operation formerly led by
> Gary Maki. The center designed and developed microchips used on NASA
> missions, among other projects, and Maki had a history of high-profile
> breakthroughs.
>
> In 2005, the Hasses told a university auditor that Maki and others at
> CAMBR were improperly using UI resources to benefit two private spinoff
> companies owned by Maki and research colleagues. A UI audit concluded that
> Maki and others deliberately directed public resources to benefit the
> companies - using university equipment, personnel and office space to
> support one firm, and doing company business on university time, among
> other issues.
>
> As a result, the UI toughened its policies managing conflicts of interest
> between researchers and the for-profit enterprises that arise from their
> discoveries.
>
> Kenneth Hass worked as a professor at the center, and Martha Hass was in
> administrative support before moving to another department and eventually
> leaving the UI. They said they faced retaliation from supervisors and
> administrators for reporting their concerns.
>
> Kenneth Hass was also the subject of a letter to UI officials - apparently
> authored by Maki, but signed by a NASA official - questioning whether he
> provided sensitive information to unauthorized sources, including "foreign
> agents."
>
> The UI said that allegation, as well as others from Maki that Kenneth Hass
> had tried to sabotage CAMBR projects, were unfounded.
>
> Maki was demoted in 2007 from director of CAMBR to professor there, and he
> retired this month. The Hasses now live in Lewisburg, Pa., where Kenneth
> is a professor at Bucknell University.
>
> Neither the UI nor the Hasses' attorney would comment further on the case,
> under the conditions of the agreement.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Seeya at homecoming, Moscow.
>
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>
> "The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
> and the Realist adjusts his sails."
>
> - Unknown
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list