| ► LA County attorney Nancy Takade; enabler for public official misfits |
 |
 |
|
LA County attorney Nancy Takade; enabler for public official misfits  Reporter Rong-Gong Lin II of the LA Times reported today in a story titled: “L.A. County delays release of names and salaries of its highest paid employees.” (See story at: http://tinyurl.com/25ga7n2).
Nancy Takade, LA Counties principal deputy counsel, had the chutzpah to tell the Times that many employees “have expressed personal safety and similar concerns about such disclosure.” Ms. Takade then went on to say “As some of these concerns are potentially legitimate, especially those relating to personal safety, the county developed a process by which employees may request anonymity for personal safety and other legitimate reasons.” She added that the requested date, “with appropriate redactions as to employees requiring anonymity,” would probably be ready in early October.
One someone decides to accept wages and/or benefits from the public; they have forever forfeited their right to anonymity. If a public servant demands anonymity as to his/her salary, then I’d suggest they quit and go to work in the private sector. I hear tell there are openings for greeters at the local Wal-Mart.
In 2007, the California Supreme Court ruled that the salaries paid to public employees in Contra Costa County were “public records” and had to be disclosed upon request. Apparently, Ms. Takade is unwilling to comport her conduct with the mandates of the Supreme Court. She took an oath when she became an attorney to so act. Such conduct in my opinion is clearly unethical.
To suggest that LA County employees earning in excess of $240,000 a year are lawfully entitled to opt out of disclosing their salaries to the public that pays them is facially absurd. To claim that such disclosure would or could impact upon an employee’s “personal safety” is even more absurd. In fact, it doesn’t pass the involuntary laugh test.
It would seem as though Ms. Takade may well be guilty of “plagiarism” by claiming the release of said information would impact on an employee’s “personal safety.” This is the same hyperbolic (BS) argument that the State Senate and Assembly used in mid-2009 in response to my request for copies of their travel records. In his 03/24/09 letter, Greg Schmidt, Secretary of the Senate said, “We believe that the disclosure of their [Senators] air schedules and related travel information poses a serious risk to the security of the individual senators and therefore, the public interest served by its disclosure is clearly outweighed by the public interest served in not making the disclosure public.”
What is truly laughable about the Senate denial as to “air schedules” is the fact that if one visits the website of most legislators; they consistently post their future travel itineraries. As with our esteemed Senate/Assembly members, the only fear that LA County employees have is that the public will be outraged to discover just how much they are being paid in comparison to what the same job pays in the private sector.
Ms. Takade should be ashamed of herself for putting forth a defense that she absolutely knows is in violation of the 2007 California Supreme Court case involving Contra Costa County. Hmmm, I wonder if Ms. Takade is one of the County employees who will opt to remain anonymous as to her wages.
If I was in charge of the LA Times, I wouldn't wait for Ms. Takade to provide me with "redacted" wage reports that fail to disclose the names and earnings of those making more than $250,000 a year. I would suggest that they just go ahead an file a Mandamus action with the local Court of Appeals and ask for an expedited hearing and/or ruling based on the Supreme Court's 2007 decision re: Contra Costa County.
PUT SIMPLY, THE OVERTAXED CITIZENS OF LA COUNTY HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO KNOW HOW MUCH THEY ARE PAYING THESE FOLKS!!
|