Save Our Libraries to file official complaint

By Jeff — Jeff Wilson

The lawyer for the Save our Libraries group has completed a complaint against the City of Santa Clarita and is preparing to file it Monday morning.

Now this whole post should be tagged with a IANAL (I am not a lawyer) disclaimer, but here’s what I think Don Ricketts, the attorney who composed the complaint on behalf of Save our Libraries, is arguing:

Sometime after TimBen Boydston and Marsha McLean first chaired the City’s ad hoc library committee (which, according to the complaint, was created “to
explore means of funding the construction of the new Newhall Library”), the purpose of the committee was altered “to explore the prospect of privatizing the CITY’s libraries.”
The complaint alleges that Darren Hernandez was meeting with LSSI at the same time the City of Santa Clarita was negotiating with the County of Los Angeles over the “operation and maintenance” of the new Newhall library.
The complaint mentions (but does not seem to allege itself) that some members of the community have alleged Brown Act violations in that there are “No records of the deliberations and activities of the ad hoc committee and Defendant HERNANDEZ’s discussions/negotiations with LSSI US.”
That’s just the primer. The actual meat of the complaint (or the “First Cause of Action”) is much more intriguing. The complaint -citing California law- says it is improper for a private corporation to gather data on borrower’s habits:

37. Equally improper would be to allow LSSI US to gather the data anew, as a condition of continued library privileges and collecting usage data (often generally referred to as the “borrowing history”). The data is still confidential and

may not be gathered or used by a private company as a condition of continued use of the books and other resources of publicly owned libraries, operated on publicly owned facilities, by public employees who are directly subject to California law.

…

39. Placing that data in the hands of a private, for-profit corporation, with non-public employees and connections to foreign entities not subject to U.S. laws dilutes, at least, those protections and the damage done by doing so is irreparable

and cannot be fully compensated for by damage actions, individual or class, for privacy violations.

The complaint ends by asking the court to restrain the City from entering into a contract with LSSI “or, if a contract has been entered into, restraining Defendants from
carrying out its provisions” and pay any attorney’s fees.

Are there any lawyers in the house who could analyze this complaint for its merits and tell us what the next steps will be?

Here is the full complaint:

Save Our Libraries complaint against Santa Clarita

I think it’s unfortunate that it has come to this; the City obviously underestimated how much people in town value our libraries (the Valencia library is or was the most popular library in the County after all) and overestimated its ability to sell library patrons on the outsourcing idea. When we first talked about this on SCVTalk back in July, most of us were skeptical of this idea, but still open to it. We just needed some more convincing, some more questions answered (particularly regarding the borrowing rights of people outside the city lines). We wanted public outreach meetings prior to a decision being made, and we wanted the whole movement to be transparent and open.

And that reaction was from people who read SCVTalk, who are invested in this town and follow news closely. Can you imagine how people who are heavy library users but don’t follow the news so closely felt when they heard the news after the decision was made?

Instead of a proper, orderly and transparent process, we got a rushed decision (less than 60 days by my count), outreach to only a few stakeholders (like the Chamber and other organizations, but not actual library users), and we got snowed during the August 24th council meeting, when hundreds showed up to oppose the impending decision. And then, the final rub: from the documents we posted this week on SCVTalk, the City was apparently talking to LSSI way back in June, before this idea was even made public.

In short, people feel wronged by this and they’re coming out in droves to fight it. It’s their right under the law to file a complaint.

Comments (58)

august LaurelOctober 2, 2010 at 10:58 am

Jeff, I appreciate your love of libraries, and exposing the city council for what they’ve done, but it’s a low blow to post a DRAFT of someones legal documents. If it had been filed in court, well, ok.

JeffOctober 2, 2010 at 11:43 am

It is not a low blow. I got this document from Mr. Ricketts himself.

Cheryl PhillipsOctober 2, 2010 at 9:26 pm

Thanks so much, Jeff, for being our information guru and delivering your info in a professional way. It is sad that it has to come to this, but this seems to be the norm in today’s world. Politicians more often than not, forget that they are “representatives” of the people in their community. They are “our” libraries, paid for by “our” tax dollars – we should have been in the conversation from the very beginning whenever that was.

Jim FarleyOctober 2, 2010 at 11:17 am

Transparency and openness from the current city management and council is not likely to ever happen. Thanks for the details on this Jeff. This is just one more example of the city being out of touch with it’s citizens. They know they can afford to be out of touch by the way elections are rigged for the incumbents. Add to this that Ferry’s arrogance has got his ‘teat in the ringer’ with the latest scandal(s). When will the citizens of Santa Clarita learn.

august LaurelOctober 2, 2010 at 12:38 pm

If Mr. Ricketts gave you the documents, then I apologize.

Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 1:31 pm

Jeff, you ask, “Can you imagine how people who are heavy library users but don’t follow the news so closely felt when they heard the news after the decision was made?” You don’t have to imagine, because he am me and I goin ta tell ya. I moved to Newhall about a year and a half ago. I thought I was retiring to one of the oldest communities in California, rich in history, where Wyatt Earp dealt seconds to Bill Hart, Tom Mix and Walt Disney. I didn’t know what a New Old Town was (still don’t), but I knew about Canyon Country, because several people I’d worked with in Culver City lived there. And I knew about Saugus, because I used to have a booth at the swap meet and before that went to the drag races there (although I preferred the stock car races in Long Beach and Riverside). I knew that Valencia was a collection of chain restaurants and hotels built to support the roller coasters and water slides at Magic Mountain. But I knew nothing of the city of Santa Clarita. Oh, I knew there was a big building call city hall, but since it was next door to the Valencia library and across the street from the Valencia Town Center, I just kinda assumed it was the Valencia City Hall. Then on August 22, my son asked me if I’d heard that the city of Santa Clarita wanted to take the Valencia, Newhall and Canyon Country libraries away from the county. So I wrote a speech and appeared before the city council. Now I know that there is a city of Santa Clarita. That bell is rung and there ain’t no unringing it. I’ve only been studying on the for a little over a month now, but here’s what I’ve learned so far. In 1986 four communities in the Santa Clarita Valley – Valencia, Newhall, Saugus and Canyon Country – joined to form the city of Santa Clarita. It was a move financed primarily by 6 flags over Texas to gain political control for their investment in California. The most important person in the city of Santa Clarita is the city manager. I don’t know what we pay this guy (his suits look like they cost more then most people I know make), but whatever it is, he earns it. His job is to keep straight all the contracts that the city has with out of state corporations to provide the services provide by the city in most other locals. He also has to make sure no one says or does anything official to offend any of the other out of state corporations doing business here, or says or does anything that might give one the idea that the city is actually in California. The role of the city council is less clear. In the 3 meetings I have attended, they have done nothing but approve whatever the city manager says. The one exception is Bob Kellar’s “no” vote on the library take over, but he apologized profusely for that, so it doesn’t really count. And why do we have a mayor? As far as I can see she does nothing that mayors do most places. She does vote “aye” instead of “yes” like everyone else. Is that it? And what is a “mayor pro temp”? Never heard that one before. If it means “would like to be mayor but we don’t trust her with the responsibilities of mayor, even though there aren’t any”, then we got the right person for the job.

Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm

DJG: Welcome to the community! A couple of clarifications for you from a relative newbie (14 years plus). Santa Clarita does not have an executive mayor elected directly by the voters. The voters elect five city council members on an at large basis and the council members then choose who will be “mayor” on a one year term basis.. The mayor’s only official duty is to preside over the council meetings. The mayor pro tem’s only official duty is to step in and run the meetings if the mayor is absent. Unofficially, the mayor gets to appear in public (ribbon cuttings and such like) as the ceremonial “head” of the City. The Mayor Pro Tem is USUALLY, but not always, the person who will be mayor next. Interesting aprocyphal story about Six Flags. From Carl Boyer’s detailed history of incorporation Six Flags had NOTHING to do with incorporation and in fact still lies outside the City limits in the County.

Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm

As I’ve commented before, back when the City was formed the City Council voted to have a “City Manager” style of government, essentially delegating all of their powers to the City Manager, except for powers which the Legislature specifically requires the City Council to exercise. Under the City Manager form of city government, all of the city employees except the City Attorney work for the City Manager, not the City Council. Each subsequent City Council has acquiesced in that decision by not changing it. The way to change it is in the City Manager’s contract, because by crowning him City Manager a City Council invests him with the full power created by the Legislature. The power to run the City. At one point in time, angered at the actions of the former City Manager George Caravalho, who defied what the City Council had instructed him to do, a 3 person majority of the City Council fired Caravalho in closed session and hoped to hire a new City Manager under a new contract which had deal terms which would cut back on the new City Manager’s statutory power. However, as told, at that time, by those City Council members City Attorney Carl Newton screwed up something to do with the notice for that meeting and/or the subsequent public meeting to announce Mr. Caravalho’s firing. During the very short time period necessary to fix that glitch, a public session of a City Council meeting was held where Caravalho’s poker buddies, comprised of important business men in the community, rallied an odd ball assortment of people to come and speak on Mr. Caravalho’s behalf, and at least one vote to fire him was quietly changed. Notable in that public session were the protestations of admiration for Mr. Caravalho let by “his” employees, including the current City Manager and Planning Director. After that ill fated attempt by the City Council to take back some of the power to run the City of Santa Clarita, Mr. Caravalho began looking for another job. He ultimately left to become the City Manager of Riverside. Current City Manager Ken Pulskamp was appointed “Acting City Manager” (bad move #1) and ultimately the City Council decided to hire Mr. Pulskamp as permanent City Manager (bad move #2). In that interim time period, Mr. Pulskamp was at his charming best, and in negotiating his contract the City Council completely forgot about their desire to take back direct power over the City’s affairs (bad move #3). (You can do a public records act request to see that contract.) The result, which most Santa Claritans do not grasp, is that the City Council is NOT in charge of most decision making on behalf of the City. Decision making is done by the City Manager and his staff, based upon his view of the best interests of the municipal CORPORATION called Santa Clarita. The decisions are not made in the best interest of the public, but instead in the best interests of the CORPORATION. And what does this CORPORATION want? What ever the person in control of it wants. Just like Wall Street and Hewlitt Packard. In California city government is not a communal decision making process. It’s not even a decision making process where a City Council is supposed to be responsive to the desires of the people who elected them. Absent diligent action by City Council members having the skills of municipal lawyers, which Santa Clarita’s council members DO NOT have, the City is run and will be run by the City Manager. And why does the City Manager want what he wants? Because it’s fun to run the show and drive the ship of state. It’s Sim City LIVE, and those who play Sim City know how mad you would be if someone interfered with or made changes to the city you had designed. One man, one decision maker, no votes. Get it?

Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 2:24 pm

So I pretty much got it right. Must be more careful before my next move, maybe to Castaic.

spineflower2October 2, 2010 at 3:14 pm

Does the County run that way? Or do they have a democratically-elected decision making body in the Supervisors?

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 3:31 pm

Our county government has the same form of manager-council relationship as the city, with a “strong executive” and five elected officials with equal powers. The biggest difference is that the county is divided into five geographical districts, so in the county, we don’t get to elect four of the five people who have equal decision-making powers over our lives.

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 6:37 pm

Coastal – just one little note & question. You say, “back when the City was formed the City Council voted to have a City Manager style of government.” Under California law, newly formed cities must be general-law cities (as opposed to charter cities). General law cities have a city manager form of government with five elected council members who select one member to serve as titular mayor for a year. When the city was formed in 1987, no council member had any experience in organizing a city. The fledgling council hired a guy who had experience setting up new cities (Fred Bien) as its initial, interim city manager before hiring a guy with experience running cities (George Caravalho). If you’re critical of the council “back when the city was formed” (1987) for failing to adopt a charter that set forth a “strong mayor” form of government …. well. Let’s say the new 1987 City Council had immediately (or soon thereafter) adopted a charter that empowered the mayor (Buck McKeon) with the responsibilities of organizing the city (establishing and staffing its various departments). How would he have done it?

Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 8:44 pm

I won’t say anything unkind about Congress McKeon. Yours is really a rhetorical question. A general law city can hire a City Manager, but then limit his/her authority through the terms of his/her contract. Santa Clarita did not do that when it was formed, despite being represented by one of the most preeminent municipal law firms in Southern California. When George Caravalho was in the process of being nearly fired, limiting the power of a new city manager in his contract was being discussed, in terms of allowing the City Council to hire and fire key staff people directly, and other deal terms. However it never happened. And it still hasn’t happened. And it will never happen under the current regime. Unless you’ve got someone on the Council smart and energetic enough to take a red pen to each and every resolution drafted by the staff, to reflect what the Council agree they want in any given meeting, any lip serve paid by the City Manager’s staff to the council (e.g. Hernandez making promises to McLean on terms under which the City libraries would deal with County residents,) is just that. Meaningless talk.

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 9:24 pm

Hi! Not asking you to say anything unkind about Mr. McKeon. Quite the contrary. Mr. McKeon (and the other original council members) were wise enough to know they needed to hire “professional help” to set up the city.

Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 1:04 pm

As I indicated, the Government Code gives a City Council of a general law city to option to adopt the City Manager form of government, unequivocably or with limitations on the City Manager’s powers. (34852) 34851. An ordinance establishing a city manager form of government may be: (a) Enacted by the legislative body; or (b) Submitted to the electors by the legislative body at any municipal or special election; or (c) Submitted by the people as an initiative measure. 34852. The ordinance shall define the powers and duties of the city manager and may fix his compensation or the minimum amount he is to receive. 34855. Within sixty days after the effective date of the ordinance, the legislative body shall appoint a city manager, who need not be a resident of the city at the time of his appointment. 34856. The city manager may appoint and dismiss the chief of police and other subordinate appointive officers and employees except the city attorney. When the offices of city clerk and city treasurer are made appointive, appointments to such offices shall be made by the city council unless the city council vests such appointing power in the city manager by ordinance. 34857. Upon appointment of the city manager, the terms of subordinate officers over whom he has power of appointment and removal cease, unless they are reappointed by him. 34858. Any city adopting the city manager form of government may abolish it in the manner in which it was adopted. Obviously, no one is talking about a strong mayor form of government. Instead, the discussion is limiting the Santa Clarita City Manager and his staff’s imperious decision making powers which the Council has a right to do by statute or contract. The fact that the Council refuses to do so simply reinforces the presumptuousness of the City Manager’s staff. (34856) Raising the issue of a “strong mayor” is irrelevant to the discussion of the City Manager in Santa Clarita having too much power. Yes, one needs a charter to have a “strong mayor” form of government, like the City of Los Angeles has, but no one is arguing in favor of that point. The issue is the City Manager in Santa Clarita having too much power, and the City Councils past and present doing nothing to reign Mr. Pulskamp, and his predecessor/mentor Mr. Caravalho, in.

Leon WordenOctober 3, 2010 at 1:14 pm

Hi Coastal! I’m familiar with the code. Generally a “limitation” on the powers of the city manager goes hand-in-hand with switching to a “strong mayor” system (essentially replacing a professional manager with a politician). I’ve never thought of it any other way, and I’m curious to know (seriously!) – how you would envision what you propose. What powers would you limit, and how would you go about limiting them, short of handing the power to an elected mayor? Would you like to see the (currently part-time) city council become a full-time gig, with responsibilities to micromanage? If so, what aspects of city government should the city council members micromanage? Thanks – I’m just trying to get a picture of what you envision.

Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 2:41 pm

Right. Actually, you’re aggressively defending the City Council which funds your TV station, as well as aggressively defending the editorial policy of The Signal on whose Editorial Board you sit. As an example, with respect to the library controversy, it’s fairly obvious that the City Manager and his staff went full steam ahead to set all the pieces into place to implement THEIR plan to take over the library-related general property tax cash flow generated in the City. There was no intelligent discussion, in public, among the Council members, mid summer or when they took their vote about the “deal terms” of such a library take over. As discovery progresses in the various lawsuits which occur with respect to the library, I am sure the City staff’s control of shaping the deal will be well documented. It will be interesting to see whether (A) Darren Hernandez kept each Council member apprised of what was going on, and negotiated for their vote, in private, as the agent of a daisy chain style serial meeting violating the Brown Act or (B) the Council has little or no brain function, because of their reliance on the City Manager, and simply knee jerk rubber stamped the staff’s decision. Either way, the road leads to impeachment of any thought that Santa Clarita’s City Council is actually in charge. Factually they are not.

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 1:33 pm

Meanwhile, the county saves $1 million every six months ($1 million MORE of your money that isn’t being spent here) by keeping the Canyon Country Library closed.

Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:14 pm

Leon: The anti-County bashing was getting old when you threw Daryl Manzer off the Signal editorial page and it CERTAINLY has reached its sell by date now!

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 2:22 pm

Tim: Under what circumstance is it “county-bashing” to point out that the county is saving $1MM every six months by keeping the CC Library closed? Facts is facts, and if you don’t like them, it’s not my problem. I brought Darryl Manzer (and others, such as Gary Horton) INTO The Signal. If someone “threw him off,” it wasn’t me!

Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:33 pm

I apologize Leon. I thought you told Daryl he needed to stop bashing Mike Antonovich week in and week out. Certainly within an editor’s prerogative to stop a boring weekly 800 words on the evilness of a single elected official.

Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 2:48 pm

Mike is mellowing in his final term. Trying to build a legacy of doing good, just like the Governator is now doing.

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 3:25 pm

Hi Tim! Now that you mention it, I do recall that there were specific people who complained to the publisher (I don’t remember which publisher) about some of the things Darryl wrote…. not that I cared. There is always someone who doesn’t agree with any given opinion column. My attitude was – is – that if you don’t like what someone writes, write something to rebut it. Fight fire with fire. Tim, did I ever tell you what to write? (I’m halfway serious. It’s a blur. But I doubt it.) All opinions are valid if they’re honest. In all my years at The Signal, there were exactly two people whom I was compelled to ban from the editorial pages. Not because of their opinions. Rather, because of flat-out lies. I’ll explain. Once in a while, actually more frequently than you know, people would submit guest columns with factual errors. I’d point them out to the writer prior to publication, and 998 times out of 1,000, the writer would correct the errors and resubmit the column. (The factual errors weren’t usually so egregious that they changed the writer’s opinion.) On two occasions — actually multiple occasions involving the same two people — a writer would say he KNEW the information was false, and insist that I publish it anyway, which of course I would not do. I did not knowingly allow factual errors to be published in The Signal. These two writers would get upset, refuse to correct the errors, and try it again. Eventually it got to the point where I had to ban them. They’re still around …. but they don’t appear in The Signal. I never banned anyone for his or her opinion. Rather, I went out of my way to find a variety of (conflicting!) opinions for the editorial pages. (And by the way, Josh, if you’re reading this, you’re doing a great job!)

Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 2:27 pm

Leon, have you every been in a library, do you think Barnes & Noble when you think of book store?

Street KnowledgeOctober 2, 2010 at 9:50 pm

McKeon’s animal husbandry degree would really help him wrangle a goat fucker like Frank Ferry, that’s for sure.

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 1:33 pm

{test msg}

RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 1:41 pm

What a creative legal angle! Mr. Ricketts’ sole point is on the legally required confidentiality of patron circulation records and not anything improper on the part of city staff or council. The statements about staff speaking with LSSI is whining and isn’t supportive of his privacy arguement (besides I sure hope they spoke with them and investigated the firm instead of just relying on their proposal). If he’s correct in his unique view of this law, then a public library couldn’t have a private technology contractor troubleshoot library computer hardward or manage or maintain library software and networks. On the other hand, section 6267(a) cited on the top of page #7 does authorize the disclosure of circulation information “by a person acting within the scope of his or her duties within the administration of the library.” This would seem to apply to a “person” who is a public or private sector employee of the library. (Didn’t the US Supreme Court recently deem corporations to be “people” too?) Ricketts’ arguement seems like a stretch, but you never know what will happen before a Judge of the LA County Superior Court.

Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:25 pm

Remstar: I don’t think its a stretch. Many times has it been mooted that the DMV should be privatized but this very law is always trotted out as preventing it. The same with tax collections, etc. If LSSI is a “person” under the control of the City, then Mr. Ricketts has negated it with his assertion that LSSI is owned by a foreign company that is beyond the reach of US laws that would provide for court enforcement of privacy. The City is unlikely to get this dismissed on summary judgment and the issuance of even a short TRO would delay the takeover for another year due to the notification window.

RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 7:28 pm

The injunctive and declaratory relief being sought is for the court to prevent them from contracting with LSSI and not to prevent them from withdrawing from the county library system. So if the judge says they can’t hire LSSI they could just hire the employees themselves or contract with another city for the service. Also, I did a little bit of internet research and found (on a union site, ironically) that LSSI is incorporated under the laws of Maryland and that the owners of the company are the founders and an American private equity firm. LSSI apparently has an affiliate in England (LSSI LTD) that’s organized under British law, but it doesn’t own LSSI LLC.

Timothy MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 8:43 pm

Remstar: I know they are trying to stop the contract with LSSI. That is Mr. Ricketts’s cleverness. The Brown Act “violations” are desultory and easily cured. If the City get enjoined from hiring LSSI, it is extremely unlikely they can get three votes to purchase the libraries and set up their own library infrastructure. By the way, the private equity firm that owns LSSI has a holding company in the UK that is the ultimate parent, so the declarations are true.

Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 1:41 pm

The draft Complaint: I love it. My compliments to Attorney Ricketts. Now to pray for an intellectually responsible judge.

Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:31 pm

I was interested in your opinion CS. I thought it was brilliant and elegant?

Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 2:50 pm

Elegant in its simplicity. Leaving room for further litigation on different theories as things progress.

RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 8:11 pm

The majority of the employees of the LA County Public Library are “part-timers” employed through a private sector staffing firm. They do it that way so they can pay them less and don’t have to give them a county pension. WHAT?!? There are a bunch on private sector non-union employees who don’t get a government pension and don’t have a master of library science working in our County libraries!?!?! The LA County Public Library has outsourced their part-time employees??!!??NOOOO!!!!!! LSSI is essentially a private sector staffing firm. Sooooooooooo, if Ricketts is successful in blocking Santa Clarita from contracting with LSSI because of a new interpretation of the public records act, the result would be that no public library in California could expose patron data to persons who are not public-sector library employees. And the impact of that would be to torpedo the budget of the LA County Public Library.

Timothy MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 8:46 pm

Only if someone tries to enjoin them from doing so…. The state court injunction only applies to the person or entity it is issued to.

RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 9:15 pm

If Ricketts is successful in knocking down this door, the public employee unions will charge right through.

Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 8:48 pm

Not good legal reasoning Remstar. By the way, are you a new poster on SCVTALK whose goal is to reflect the opinions of senior city staff?

RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 9:29 pm

I carry water for nobody. I’m just a local cynic without an agenda. Having said that, I’ve read enough on here to know you’re prone to casting aspersions on, and questioning the motives of, those who hold opinions different, and less poisonous, than yours. You have anger issues. Nice to meet you. Please feel free to engage me in dialogue that will help me better understand all perspectives on an issue. But please don’t characterize my opinions as reflective of anyone other than myself.

softrevolutionOctober 2, 2010 at 11:26 pm

Actually, the part time staff are not employed through a private sector staffing firm. They are employed through the county, are apart of the union, and do have a pension-savings plan.

augustOctober 3, 2010 at 6:38 am

Part time COLA employees are NOT hired through a private firm. They are hired directly by County.

JustPassingThroughOctober 3, 2010 at 8:29 am

Is this what Marsha McLean meant when she said to make sure people get accurate, factual information? HA! Just another example of the gross ignorance the council and city staff have regarding the County and its library system operations. As other people have noted, all of the library employees INCLUDING the part time staff, are hired by, and work directly for LA County. They are offered medical and dental insurance if they would like it and they may also opt to participate in a pension-savings plan. And yes, they are also part of the union. But no, they do not get a traditional “defined benefit” pension upon retirement. Under LSSI (should any of them get hired by LSSI that is) they would not get anything beyond their hourly wage. LSSI does not offer benefits to its part-time employees.

Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 2:30 pm

The complaint completely misses the point, but so what? It’s like putting Al Capone in prison for income tax evation. It gets the job done.

Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 9:45 pm

Some good library news -> http://www.scvtv.com/html/laco092910aadlibrarybtv.html

Daddy Joe GOctober 3, 2010 at 8:59 am

Great to learn I don’t have to leave SCV to find intelligent life forms. I just have to get out of this city.

GregOctober 3, 2010 at 1:14 pm

I’m sorry but I rather have the City Manager making decisions rather than the City Council. Our City Council lacks the knowledge and expertise to do a comprehensive analysis. Also Council is a part time job and I would not trust them to say that did a full comprehensive look at issues. If people are advocating stripping the City Manager of powers, then the Council needs to become a full time job like LA city and meet more often.

SCV SageOctober 3, 2010 at 1:16 pm

Folks: I know Donald Rickett of Reape & Rickett law firm, one of the better Family Law firms anywhere. He is filing a verified complaint — which means that any response by the City and any defendants named, including Pulskamp and Hernandez is UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY or not responded to due to lack of information. This may be another trap for these “public servants”. As far as Caravalho goes — he was involved in all sorts of unbelievable situations, including subjecting our City to sexual harassment claims, despite the fact that he was married. Jo Anne Darcy when informed of some of these repeat, serial shenaningans said, “we told him to knock it off”. BUT, what folks forget is that Pulskamp and others are/were trained by Caravalho in more ways than one. When he taught courses in Planning and Public Administration he would frequently brag about how he was manipulating the Santa Clarita City Council. We have all sorts of financial baggage from this era, i.e. $20 million plus Golden Valley judgment against the City; the leased Metrolink station at/near Saugus Speedway, etc. Pulskamp and Company are no different than Caravalho. They are just as corrupt and unethical. What makes you think that they or any Commission they appoint will ever listen to the citizens of our City — that is a thing of the past.We now have a City Council which is complicit in such corrupt antics — welcome to the City of “Bell”irita.

Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 3:06 pm

If I remember correctly, Mr. Caravalho was also sued for violating the California public employee whistle blower statute, with respect to a woman City employee who detected wrongdoing with respect to the City’s trash collection franchisee. That case was settled by our present City Attorney without much disclosure about the evidence against Mr. Caravalho and his immediate deputy (hint) to the City Council. Back then, Leon Worden was a crusading journalist, and was diligently working to make public the information about that City Manager and his senior staff members’ conduct which was uncovered in litigation discovery. The City staff moved heaven and earth, with the cooperation of the City Attorney, to keep that information private…and not because the “wronged” former City employee wanted it private. I’ve always worried that now that Leon is at the City’s public television station, funded by the City, that he is always at risk of losing the funding if the station raises the ire of the City Manager, senior City staff or the majority of City Council. However, now that I’ve evaluated his comments, implicitly in defense of the senior City staff’s actions, I realize that to a certain extent paying Leon to run the City’s public television station is one way to keep him fat and happy in his old age, no longer a threat to at least one of the very people whose testimony he wanted to unearth so long ago. As I’ve said before, riling up I.L., there are no more crusading journalists in the Santa Clarita Valley to keep the local politicians and their senior staff members honest. That task has falled to concerned people who communicate through “social media”.

Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 3:08 pm

“fallen” not “falled”. Dog pawing me to go out for a walk.

Leon WordenOctober 3, 2010 at 5:00 pm

Coast – It must be interesting to live in your world. As to my getting fat, you’re right, but that’s not the city’s fault. I started a new diet yesterday. As to being happy — well, you’re right. I love this little city that we formed way back when, and it’s fun to watch it grow up. A change in leadership at the end of Mr. Caravalho’s reign was needed at the time. In my experience, our city is currently staffed with people who are fiscally prudent, creative and desirous of doing a good job. You accuse me of “defending the city,” but that’s silly, because it needs no defense. As for defending The Signal’s editorials, well, The Signal doesn’t ask to be defended, although I’ll certainly defend anything I write, and I think most people know I am the first to speak up when I find out I am wrong about something. If you were paying attention, you’d know I just as quickly “defend” the county, which also needs no defense. Somebody in this forum referred to “county-bashing” the other day, and I don’t even know what that means. I mean, I deal with our county sheriff deputies every day. They are always courteous and helpful. I deal with our county firefighters every week. They do an amazing job. I have had the pleasure of working on a number of things with Supervisor Antonovich over the years as his appointee on various committees. He is a great guy who does a wonderful job in dealing with an enormous bureaucracy that is hindered by a greedy and broken state government that grabs money from cities and counties — forcing our city to tighten its belt, and putting the county in the unhappy position of having to close parks (in recent years) and libraries (today). I think the supervisor would agree that we need to pass Proposition 22 in November and force the state to knock it off. But I digress. What was your point? Did you have one?

IHeartSCVOctober 3, 2010 at 5:34 pm

“You accuse me of ‘defending the city,’ but that’s silly, because it needs no defense.” You have just illustrated Coastal Sage’s point.

Leon WordenOctober 3, 2010 at 5:49 pm

No, actually what it illustrates is one of those instances where I am wrong about something — wrong to violate one of my rules, which is not to converse with fake people who hide behind fake names.

Timothy MyersOctober 3, 2010 at 6:23 pm

Leon: We know who these folks are. I guess they need to identify themselves periodically.

cashOctober 4, 2010 at 10:31 am

Leon, anyone that makes his living off of the city would be foolish not to defend the hand that feeds him. We are no longer “this little city” that you mentioned and it is been over 20 years since it was formed. It is time to move beyond running the city with a hand shake and a pat on the back. Seems there are less than one hundred indivudals that want to control this City, as they feel that they are in some way entitled to do so. You can probably name all of them.

John CastleOctober 3, 2010 at 5:35 pm

Sage, You don’t know Donald Ricketts if you think he is with Reape and Rickett. Donald Ricketts is not with them. That is “Rickett” and his name is David. Mr. Ricketts runs a practice out of his home and does some “interesting” work Mr. Ricketts has filed other interesting things but one of the most recent is: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/efile/P/116864.pdf

JeffOctober 3, 2010 at 7:15 pm

Everyone cool it. Leon’s input and knowledge is just as welcome here as anyone else’s.

augustOctober 4, 2010 at 11:45 am

I’m glad to see Mr. Don Ricketts filing suit. (Yes, I still refuse to accept the free bookstore we’re slated to get.) When is the city council going to get it? Sorry, Marsha, we’re mad, and we’re not going away. We’re not going to stop talking about it, and we’re not going to give up until this city council is out of office. You’re supposed to be working FOR us.

dorothymantoothOctober 4, 2010 at 1:24 pm

I want to applaud Save our Libraries and Donald Ricketts for this complaint. I don’t know how this will all turn out in the end, but I do know that the City Council and the City Manager should learn to play fair. I truly think it was the sneaky swiftness of this proposal that soured everybody! I am a fan of our County Library system and often tell people how convienent it is to use, but I would have been WAY more open to learning about LSSI if given a chance. The City Council will say we were given that chance, but most of us were blindsided. Shame on us for not paying attention to every little detail of our city government. More importantly, shame on them for trying to pull a fast one!

RickOctober 15, 2010 at 7:55 am

Thank you, Attorney Ricketts, for coming up with this angle to stop the privatization of our libraries. My family and I do not want our records shared by this “foreign” firm–at the very least! We totally agree, the people of this community were blindsided on this issue. After attending several of our local City meetings, it’s quite apparent that the City Council does not represent the people they were elected to serve. Hearing of the City exploits of the last several years (above), I am quite ashamed of City Management. We will be actively involved in the next elections!

august LaurelOctober 2, 2010 at 10:58 am
Jeff, I appreciate your love of libraries, and exposing the city council for what they’ve done, but it’s a low blow to post a DRAFT of someones legal documents. If it had been filed in court, well, ok.
JeffOctober 2, 2010 at 11:43 am
It is not a low blow. I got this document from Mr. Ricketts himself.
Cheryl PhillipsOctober 2, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Thanks so much, Jeff, for being our information guru and delivering your info in a professional way. It is sad that it has to come to this, but this seems to be the norm in today’s world. Politicians more often than not, forget that they are “representatives” of the people in their community. They are “our” libraries, paid for by “our” tax dollars – we should have been in the conversation from the very beginning whenever that was.
Jim FarleyOctober 2, 2010 at 11:17 am
Transparency and openness from the current city management and council is not likely to ever happen. Thanks for the details on this Jeff. This is just one more example of the city being out of touch with it’s citizens. They know they can afford to be out of touch by the way elections are rigged for the incumbents. Add to this that Ferry’s arrogance has got his ‘teat in the ringer’ with the latest scandal(s). When will the citizens of Santa Clarita learn.
august LaurelOctober 2, 2010 at 12:38 pm
If Mr. Ricketts gave you the documents, then I apologize.
Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Jeff, you ask, “Can you imagine how people who are heavy library users but don’t follow the news so closely felt when they heard the news after the decision was made?” You don’t have to imagine, because he am me and I goin ta tell ya. I moved to Newhall about a year and a half ago. I thought I was retiring to one of the oldest communities in California, rich in history, where Wyatt Earp dealt seconds to Bill Hart, Tom Mix and Walt Disney. I didn’t know what a New Old Town was (still don’t), but I knew about Canyon Country, because several people I’d worked with in Culver City lived there. And I knew about Saugus, because I used to have a booth at the swap meet and before that went to the drag races there (although I preferred the stock car races in Long Beach and Riverside). I knew that Valencia was a collection of chain restaurants and hotels built to support the roller coasters and water slides at Magic Mountain. But I knew nothing of the city of Santa Clarita. Oh, I knew there was a big building call city hall, but since it was next door to the Valencia library and across the street from the Valencia Town Center, I just kinda assumed it was the Valencia City Hall. Then on August 22, my son asked me if I’d heard that the city of Santa Clarita wanted to take the Valencia, Newhall and Canyon Country libraries away from the county. So I wrote a speech and appeared before the city council. Now I know that there is a city of Santa Clarita. That bell is rung and there ain’t no unringing it. I’ve only been studying on the for a little over a month now, but here’s what I’ve learned so far. In 1986 four communities in the Santa Clarita Valley – Valencia, Newhall, Saugus and Canyon Country – joined to form the city of Santa Clarita. It was a move financed primarily by 6 flags over Texas to gain political control for their investment in California. The most important person in the city of Santa Clarita is the city manager. I don’t know what we pay this guy (his suits look like they cost more then most people I know make), but whatever it is, he earns it. His job is to keep straight all the contracts that the city has with out of state corporations to provide the services provide by the city in most other locals. He also has to make sure no one says or does anything official to offend any of the other out of state corporations doing business here, or says or does anything that might give one the idea that the city is actually in California. The role of the city council is less clear. In the 3 meetings I have attended, they have done nothing but approve whatever the city manager says. The one exception is Bob Kellar’s “no” vote on the library take over, but he apologized profusely for that, so it doesn’t really count. And why do we have a mayor? As far as I can see she does nothing that mayors do most places. She does vote “aye” instead of “yes” like everyone else. Is that it? And what is a “mayor pro temp”? Never heard that one before. If it means “would like to be mayor but we don’t trust her with the responsibilities of mayor, even though there aren’t any”, then we got the right person for the job.
Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm
DJG: Welcome to the community! A couple of clarifications for you from a relative newbie (14 years plus). Santa Clarita does not have an executive mayor elected directly by the voters. The voters elect five city council members on an at large basis and the council members then choose who will be “mayor” on a one year term basis.. The mayor’s only official duty is to preside over the council meetings. The mayor pro tem’s only official duty is to step in and run the meetings if the mayor is absent. Unofficially, the mayor gets to appear in public (ribbon cuttings and such like) as the ceremonial “head” of the City. The Mayor Pro Tem is USUALLY, but not always, the person who will be mayor next. Interesting aprocyphal story about Six Flags. From Carl Boyer’s detailed history of incorporation Six Flags had NOTHING to do with incorporation and in fact still lies outside the City limits in the County.
Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm
As I’ve commented before, back when the City was formed the City Council voted to have a “City Manager” style of government, essentially delegating all of their powers to the City Manager, except for powers which the Legislature specifically requires the City Council to exercise. Under the City Manager form of city government, all of the city employees except the City Attorney work for the City Manager, not the City Council. Each subsequent City Council has acquiesced in that decision by not changing it. The way to change it is in the City Manager’s contract, because by crowning him City Manager a City Council invests him with the full power created by the Legislature. The power to run the City. At one point in time, angered at the actions of the former City Manager George Caravalho, who defied what the City Council had instructed him to do, a 3 person majority of the City Council fired Caravalho in closed session and hoped to hire a new City Manager under a new contract which had deal terms which would cut back on the new City Manager’s statutory power. However, as told, at that time, by those City Council members City Attorney Carl Newton screwed up something to do with the notice for that meeting and/or the subsequent public meeting to announce Mr. Caravalho’s firing. During the very short time period necessary to fix that glitch, a public session of a City Council meeting was held where Caravalho’s poker buddies, comprised of important business men in the community, rallied an odd ball assortment of people to come and speak on Mr. Caravalho’s behalf, and at least one vote to fire him was quietly changed. Notable in that public session were the protestations of admiration for Mr. Caravalho let by “his” employees, including the current City Manager and Planning Director. After that ill fated attempt by the City Council to take back some of the power to run the City of Santa Clarita, Mr. Caravalho began looking for another job. He ultimately left to become the City Manager of Riverside. Current City Manager Ken Pulskamp was appointed “Acting City Manager” (bad move #1) and ultimately the City Council decided to hire Mr. Pulskamp as permanent City Manager (bad move #2). In that interim time period, Mr. Pulskamp was at his charming best, and in negotiating his contract the City Council completely forgot about their desire to take back direct power over the City’s affairs (bad move #3). (You can do a public records act request to see that contract.) The result, which most Santa Claritans do not grasp, is that the City Council is NOT in charge of most decision making on behalf of the City. Decision making is done by the City Manager and his staff, based upon his view of the best interests of the municipal CORPORATION called Santa Clarita. The decisions are not made in the best interest of the public, but instead in the best interests of the CORPORATION. And what does this CORPORATION want? What ever the person in control of it wants. Just like Wall Street and Hewlitt Packard. In California city government is not a communal decision making process. It’s not even a decision making process where a City Council is supposed to be responsive to the desires of the people who elected them. Absent diligent action by City Council members having the skills of municipal lawyers, which Santa Clarita’s council members DO NOT have, the City is run and will be run by the City Manager. And why does the City Manager want what he wants? Because it’s fun to run the show and drive the ship of state. It’s Sim City LIVE, and those who play Sim City know how mad you would be if someone interfered with or made changes to the city you had designed. One man, one decision maker, no votes. Get it?
Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 2:24 pm
So I pretty much got it right. Must be more careful before my next move, maybe to Castaic.
spineflower2October 2, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Does the County run that way? Or do they have a democratically-elected decision making body in the Supervisors?
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 3:31 pm
Our county government has the same form of manager-council relationship as the city, with a “strong executive” and five elected officials with equal powers. The biggest difference is that the county is divided into five geographical districts, so in the county, we don’t get to elect four of the five people who have equal decision-making powers over our lives.
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Coastal – just one little note & question. You say, “back when the City was formed the City Council voted to have a City Manager style of government.” Under California law, newly formed cities must be general-law cities (as opposed to charter cities). General law cities have a city manager form of government with five elected council members who select one member to serve as titular mayor for a year. When the city was formed in 1987, no council member had any experience in organizing a city. The fledgling council hired a guy who had experience setting up new cities (Fred Bien) as its initial, interim city manager before hiring a guy with experience running cities (George Caravalho). If you’re critical of the council “back when the city was formed” (1987) for failing to adopt a charter that set forth a “strong mayor” form of government …. well. Let’s say the new 1987 City Council had immediately (or soon thereafter) adopted a charter that empowered the mayor (Buck McKeon) with the responsibilities of organizing the city (establishing and staffing its various departments). How would he have done it?
Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 8:44 pm
I won’t say anything unkind about Congress McKeon. Yours is really a rhetorical question. A general law city can hire a City Manager, but then limit his/her authority through the terms of his/her contract. Santa Clarita did not do that when it was formed, despite being represented by one of the most preeminent municipal law firms in Southern California. When George Caravalho was in the process of being nearly fired, limiting the power of a new city manager in his contract was being discussed, in terms of allowing the City Council to hire and fire key staff people directly, and other deal terms. However it never happened. And it still hasn’t happened. And it will never happen under the current regime. Unless you’ve got someone on the Council smart and energetic enough to take a red pen to each and every resolution drafted by the staff, to reflect what the Council agree they want in any given meeting, any lip serve paid by the City Manager’s staff to the council (e.g. Hernandez making promises to McLean on terms under which the City libraries would deal with County residents,) is just that. Meaningless talk.
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 9:24 pm
Hi! Not asking you to say anything unkind about Mr. McKeon. Quite the contrary. Mr. McKeon (and the other original council members) were wise enough to know they needed to hire “professional help” to set up the city.
Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 1:04 pm
As I indicated, the Government Code gives a City Council of a general law city to option to adopt the City Manager form of government, unequivocably or with limitations on the City Manager’s powers. (34852) 34851. An ordinance establishing a city manager form of government may be: (a) Enacted by the legislative body; or (b) Submitted to the electors by the legislative body at any municipal or special election; or (c) Submitted by the people as an initiative measure. 34852. The ordinance shall define the powers and duties of the city manager and may fix his compensation or the minimum amount he is to receive. 34855. Within sixty days after the effective date of the ordinance, the legislative body shall appoint a city manager, who need not be a resident of the city at the time of his appointment. 34856. The city manager may appoint and dismiss the chief of police and other subordinate appointive officers and employees except the city attorney. When the offices of city clerk and city treasurer are made appointive, appointments to such offices shall be made by the city council unless the city council vests such appointing power in the city manager by ordinance. 34857. Upon appointment of the city manager, the terms of subordinate officers over whom he has power of appointment and removal cease, unless they are reappointed by him. 34858. Any city adopting the city manager form of government may abolish it in the manner in which it was adopted. Obviously, no one is talking about a strong mayor form of government. Instead, the discussion is limiting the Santa Clarita City Manager and his staff’s imperious decision making powers which the Council has a right to do by statute or contract. The fact that the Council refuses to do so simply reinforces the presumptuousness of the City Manager’s staff. (34856) Raising the issue of a “strong mayor” is irrelevant to the discussion of the City Manager in Santa Clarita having too much power. Yes, one needs a charter to have a “strong mayor” form of government, like the City of Los Angeles has, but no one is arguing in favor of that point. The issue is the City Manager in Santa Clarita having too much power, and the City Councils past and present doing nothing to reign Mr. Pulskamp, and his predecessor/mentor Mr. Caravalho, in.
Leon WordenOctober 3, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Hi Coastal! I’m familiar with the code. Generally a “limitation” on the powers of the city manager goes hand-in-hand with switching to a “strong mayor” system (essentially replacing a professional manager with a politician). I’ve never thought of it any other way, and I’m curious to know (seriously!) – how you would envision what you propose. What powers would you limit, and how would you go about limiting them, short of handing the power to an elected mayor? Would you like to see the (currently part-time) city council become a full-time gig, with responsibilities to micromanage? If so, what aspects of city government should the city council members micromanage? Thanks – I’m just trying to get a picture of what you envision.
Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 2:41 pm
Right. Actually, you’re aggressively defending the City Council which funds your TV station, as well as aggressively defending the editorial policy of The Signal on whose Editorial Board you sit. As an example, with respect to the library controversy, it’s fairly obvious that the City Manager and his staff went full steam ahead to set all the pieces into place to implement THEIR plan to take over the library-related general property tax cash flow generated in the City. There was no intelligent discussion, in public, among the Council members, mid summer or when they took their vote about the “deal terms” of such a library take over. As discovery progresses in the various lawsuits which occur with respect to the library, I am sure the City staff’s control of shaping the deal will be well documented. It will be interesting to see whether (A) Darren Hernandez kept each Council member apprised of what was going on, and negotiated for their vote, in private, as the agent of a daisy chain style serial meeting violating the Brown Act or (B) the Council has little or no brain function, because of their reliance on the City Manager, and simply knee jerk rubber stamped the staff’s decision. Either way, the road leads to impeachment of any thought that Santa Clarita’s City Council is actually in charge. Factually they are not.
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 1:33 pm
Meanwhile, the county saves $1 million every six months ($1 million MORE of your money that isn’t being spent here) by keeping the Canyon Country Library closed.
Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:14 pm
Leon: The anti-County bashing was getting old when you threw Daryl Manzer off the Signal editorial page and it CERTAINLY has reached its sell by date now!
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Tim: Under what circumstance is it “county-bashing” to point out that the county is saving $1MM every six months by keeping the CC Library closed? Facts is facts, and if you don’t like them, it’s not my problem. I brought Darryl Manzer (and others, such as Gary Horton) INTO The Signal. If someone “threw him off,” it wasn’t me!
Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:33 pm
I apologize Leon. I thought you told Daryl he needed to stop bashing Mike Antonovich week in and week out. Certainly within an editor’s prerogative to stop a boring weekly 800 words on the evilness of a single elected official.
Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 2:48 pm
Mike is mellowing in his final term. Trying to build a legacy of doing good, just like the Governator is now doing.
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 3:25 pm
Hi Tim! Now that you mention it, I do recall that there were specific people who complained to the publisher (I don’t remember which publisher) about some of the things Darryl wrote…. not that I cared. There is always someone who doesn’t agree with any given opinion column. My attitude was – is – that if you don’t like what someone writes, write something to rebut it. Fight fire with fire. Tim, did I ever tell you what to write? (I’m halfway serious. It’s a blur. But I doubt it.) All opinions are valid if they’re honest. In all my years at The Signal, there were exactly two people whom I was compelled to ban from the editorial pages. Not because of their opinions. Rather, because of flat-out lies. I’ll explain. Once in a while, actually more frequently than you know, people would submit guest columns with factual errors. I’d point them out to the writer prior to publication, and 998 times out of 1,000, the writer would correct the errors and resubmit the column. (The factual errors weren’t usually so egregious that they changed the writer’s opinion.) On two occasions — actually multiple occasions involving the same two people — a writer would say he KNEW the information was false, and insist that I publish it anyway, which of course I would not do. I did not knowingly allow factual errors to be published in The Signal. These two writers would get upset, refuse to correct the errors, and try it again. Eventually it got to the point where I had to ban them. They’re still around …. but they don’t appear in The Signal. I never banned anyone for his or her opinion. Rather, I went out of my way to find a variety of (conflicting!) opinions for the editorial pages. (And by the way, Josh, if you’re reading this, you’re doing a great job!)
Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Leon, have you every been in a library, do you think Barnes & Noble when you think of book store?
Street KnowledgeOctober 2, 2010 at 9:50 pm
McKeon’s animal husbandry degree would really help him wrangle a goat fucker like Frank Ferry, that’s for sure.
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 1:33 pm
{test msg}
RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 1:41 pm
What a creative legal angle! Mr. Ricketts’ sole point is on the legally required confidentiality of patron circulation records and not anything improper on the part of city staff or council. The statements about staff speaking with LSSI is whining and isn’t supportive of his privacy arguement (besides I sure hope they spoke with them and investigated the firm instead of just relying on their proposal). If he’s correct in his unique view of this law, then a public library couldn’t have a private technology contractor troubleshoot library computer hardward or manage or maintain library software and networks. On the other hand, section 6267(a) cited on the top of page #7 does authorize the disclosure of circulation information “by a person acting within the scope of his or her duties within the administration of the library.” This would seem to apply to a “person” who is a public or private sector employee of the library. (Didn’t the US Supreme Court recently deem corporations to be “people” too?) Ricketts’ arguement seems like a stretch, but you never know what will happen before a Judge of the LA County Superior Court.
Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:25 pm
Remstar: I don’t think its a stretch. Many times has it been mooted that the DMV should be privatized but this very law is always trotted out as preventing it. The same with tax collections, etc. If LSSI is a “person” under the control of the City, then Mr. Ricketts has negated it with his assertion that LSSI is owned by a foreign company that is beyond the reach of US laws that would provide for court enforcement of privacy. The City is unlikely to get this dismissed on summary judgment and the issuance of even a short TRO would delay the takeover for another year due to the notification window.
RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 7:28 pm
The injunctive and declaratory relief being sought is for the court to prevent them from contracting with LSSI and not to prevent them from withdrawing from the county library system. So if the judge says they can’t hire LSSI they could just hire the employees themselves or contract with another city for the service. Also, I did a little bit of internet research and found (on a union site, ironically) that LSSI is incorporated under the laws of Maryland and that the owners of the company are the founders and an American private equity firm. LSSI apparently has an affiliate in England (LSSI LTD) that’s organized under British law, but it doesn’t own LSSI LLC.
Timothy MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 8:43 pm
Remstar: I know they are trying to stop the contract with LSSI. That is Mr. Ricketts’s cleverness. The Brown Act “violations” are desultory and easily cured. If the City get enjoined from hiring LSSI, it is extremely unlikely they can get three votes to purchase the libraries and set up their own library infrastructure. By the way, the private equity firm that owns LSSI has a holding company in the UK that is the ultimate parent, so the declarations are true.
Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 1:41 pm
The draft Complaint: I love it. My compliments to Attorney Ricketts. Now to pray for an intellectually responsible judge.
Tim MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 2:31 pm
I was interested in your opinion CS. I thought it was brilliant and elegant?
Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Elegant in its simplicity. Leaving room for further litigation on different theories as things progress.
RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 8:11 pm
The majority of the employees of the LA County Public Library are “part-timers” employed through a private sector staffing firm. They do it that way so they can pay them less and don’t have to give them a county pension. WHAT?!? There are a bunch on private sector non-union employees who don’t get a government pension and don’t have a master of library science working in our County libraries!?!?! The LA County Public Library has outsourced their part-time employees??!!??NOOOO!!!!!! LSSI is essentially a private sector staffing firm. Sooooooooooo, if Ricketts is successful in blocking Santa Clarita from contracting with LSSI because of a new interpretation of the public records act, the result would be that no public library in California could expose patron data to persons who are not public-sector library employees. And the impact of that would be to torpedo the budget of the LA County Public Library.
Timothy MyersOctober 2, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Only if someone tries to enjoin them from doing so…. The state court injunction only applies to the person or entity it is issued to.
RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 9:15 pm
If Ricketts is successful in knocking down this door, the public employee unions will charge right through.
Coastal SageOctober 2, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Not good legal reasoning Remstar. By the way, are you a new poster on SCVTALK whose goal is to reflect the opinions of senior city staff?
RemStarOctober 2, 2010 at 9:29 pm
I carry water for nobody. I’m just a local cynic without an agenda. Having said that, I’ve read enough on here to know you’re prone to casting aspersions on, and questioning the motives of, those who hold opinions different, and less poisonous, than yours. You have anger issues. Nice to meet you. Please feel free to engage me in dialogue that will help me better understand all perspectives on an issue. But please don’t characterize my opinions as reflective of anyone other than myself.
softrevolutionOctober 2, 2010 at 11:26 pm
Actually, the part time staff are not employed through a private sector staffing firm. They are employed through the county, are apart of the union, and do have a pension-savings plan.
augustOctober 3, 2010 at 6:38 am
Part time COLA employees are NOT hired through a private firm. They are hired directly by County.
JustPassingThroughOctober 3, 2010 at 8:29 am
Is this what Marsha McLean meant when she said to make sure people get accurate, factual information? HA! Just another example of the gross ignorance the council and city staff have regarding the County and its library system operations. As other people have noted, all of the library employees INCLUDING the part time staff, are hired by, and work directly for LA County. They are offered medical and dental insurance if they would like it and they may also opt to participate in a pension-savings plan. And yes, they are also part of the union. But no, they do not get a traditional “defined benefit” pension upon retirement. Under LSSI (should any of them get hired by LSSI that is) they would not get anything beyond their hourly wage. LSSI does not offer benefits to its part-time employees.
Daddy Joe GOctober 2, 2010 at 2:30 pm
The complaint completely misses the point, but so what? It’s like putting Al Capone in prison for income tax evation. It gets the job done.
Leon WordenOctober 2, 2010 at 9:45 pm
Some good library news -> http://www.scvtv.com/html/laco092910aadlibrarybtv.html
Daddy Joe GOctober 3, 2010 at 8:59 am
Great to learn I don’t have to leave SCV to find intelligent life forms. I just have to get out of this city.
GregOctober 3, 2010 at 1:14 pm
I’m sorry but I rather have the City Manager making decisions rather than the City Council. Our City Council lacks the knowledge and expertise to do a comprehensive analysis. Also Council is a part time job and I would not trust them to say that did a full comprehensive look at issues. If people are advocating stripping the City Manager of powers, then the Council needs to become a full time job like LA city and meet more often.
SCV SageOctober 3, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Folks: I know Donald Rickett of Reape & Rickett law firm, one of the better Family Law firms anywhere. He is filing a verified complaint — which means that any response by the City and any defendants named, including Pulskamp and Hernandez is UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY or not responded to due to lack of information. This may be another trap for these “public servants”. As far as Caravalho goes — he was involved in all sorts of unbelievable situations, including subjecting our City to sexual harassment claims, despite the fact that he was married. Jo Anne Darcy when informed of some of these repeat, serial shenaningans said, “we told him to knock it off”. BUT, what folks forget is that Pulskamp and others are/were trained by Caravalho in more ways than one. When he taught courses in Planning and Public Administration he would frequently brag about how he was manipulating the Santa Clarita City Council. We have all sorts of financial baggage from this era, i.e. $20 million plus Golden Valley judgment against the City; the leased Metrolink station at/near Saugus Speedway, etc. Pulskamp and Company are no different than Caravalho. They are just as corrupt and unethical. What makes you think that they or any Commission they appoint will ever listen to the citizens of our City — that is a thing of the past.We now have a City Council which is complicit in such corrupt antics — welcome to the City of “Bell”irita.
Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 3:06 pm
If I remember correctly, Mr. Caravalho was also sued for violating the California public employee whistle blower statute, with respect to a woman City employee who detected wrongdoing with respect to the City’s trash collection franchisee. That case was settled by our present City Attorney without much disclosure about the evidence against Mr. Caravalho and his immediate deputy (hint) to the City Council. Back then, Leon Worden was a crusading journalist, and was diligently working to make public the information about that City Manager and his senior staff members’ conduct which was uncovered in litigation discovery. The City staff moved heaven and earth, with the cooperation of the City Attorney, to keep that information private…and not because the “wronged” former City employee wanted it private. I’ve always worried that now that Leon is at the City’s public television station, funded by the City, that he is always at risk of losing the funding if the station raises the ire of the City Manager, senior City staff or the majority of City Council. However, now that I’ve evaluated his comments, implicitly in defense of the senior City staff’s actions, I realize that to a certain extent paying Leon to run the City’s public television station is one way to keep him fat and happy in his old age, no longer a threat to at least one of the very people whose testimony he wanted to unearth so long ago. As I’ve said before, riling up I.L., there are no more crusading journalists in the Santa Clarita Valley to keep the local politicians and their senior staff members honest. That task has falled to concerned people who communicate through “social media”.
Coastal SageOctober 3, 2010 at 3:08 pm
“fallen” not “falled”. Dog pawing me to go out for a walk.
Leon WordenOctober 3, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Coast – It must be interesting to live in your world. As to my getting fat, you’re right, but that’s not the city’s fault. I started a new diet yesterday. As to being happy — well, you’re right. I love this little city that we formed way back when, and it’s fun to watch it grow up. A change in leadership at the end of Mr. Caravalho’s reign was needed at the time. In my experience, our city is currently staffed with people who are fiscally prudent, creative and desirous of doing a good job. You accuse me of “defending the city,” but that’s silly, because it needs no defense. As for defending The Signal’s editorials, well, The Signal doesn’t ask to be defended, although I’ll certainly defend anything I write, and I think most people know I am the first to speak up when I find out I am wrong about something. If you were paying attention, you’d know I just as quickly “defend” the county, which also needs no defense. Somebody in this forum referred to “county-bashing” the other day, and I don’t even know what that means. I mean, I deal with our county sheriff deputies every day. They are always courteous and helpful. I deal with our county firefighters every week. They do an amazing job. I have had the pleasure of working on a number of things with Supervisor Antonovich over the years as his appointee on various committees. He is a great guy who does a wonderful job in dealing with an enormous bureaucracy that is hindered by a greedy and broken state government that grabs money from cities and counties — forcing our city to tighten its belt, and putting the county in the unhappy position of having to close parks (in recent years) and libraries (today). I think the supervisor would agree that we need to pass Proposition 22 in November and force the state to knock it off. But I digress. What was your point? Did you have one?
IHeartSCVOctober 3, 2010 at 5:34 pm
“You accuse me of ‘defending the city,’ but that’s silly, because it needs no defense.” You have just illustrated Coastal Sage’s point.
Leon WordenOctober 3, 2010 at 5:49 pm
No, actually what it illustrates is one of those instances where I am wrong about something — wrong to violate one of my rules, which is not to converse with fake people who hide behind fake names.
Timothy MyersOctober 3, 2010 at 6:23 pm
Leon: We know who these folks are. I guess they need to identify themselves periodically.
cashOctober 4, 2010 at 10:31 am
Leon, anyone that makes his living off of the city would be foolish not to defend the hand that feeds him. We are no longer “this little city” that you mentioned and it is been over 20 years since it was formed. It is time to move beyond running the city with a hand shake and a pat on the back. Seems there are less than one hundred indivudals that want to control this City, as they feel that they are in some way entitled to do so. You can probably name all of them.
John CastleOctober 3, 2010 at 5:35 pm
Sage, You don’t know Donald Ricketts if you think he is with Reape and Rickett. Donald Ricketts is not with them. That is “Rickett” and his name is David. Mr. Ricketts runs a practice out of his home and does some “interesting” work Mr. Ricketts has filed other interesting things but one of the most recent is: http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/efile/P/116864.pdf
JeffOctober 3, 2010 at 7:15 pm
Everyone cool it. Leon’s input and knowledge is just as welcome here as anyone else’s.
augustOctober 4, 2010 at 11:45 am
I’m glad to see Mr. Don Ricketts filing suit. (Yes, I still refuse to accept the free bookstore we’re slated to get.) When is the city council going to get it? Sorry, Marsha, we’re mad, and we’re not going away. We’re not going to stop talking about it, and we’re not going to give up until this city council is out of office. You’re supposed to be working FOR us.
dorothymantoothOctober 4, 2010 at 1:24 pm
I want to applaud Save our Libraries and Donald Ricketts for this complaint. I don’t know how this will all turn out in the end, but I do know that the City Council and the City Manager should learn to play fair. I truly think it was the sneaky swiftness of this proposal that soured everybody! I am a fan of our County Library system and often tell people how convienent it is to use, but I would have been WAY more open to learning about LSSI if given a chance. The City Council will say we were given that chance, but most of us were blindsided. Shame on us for not paying attention to every little detail of our city government. More importantly, shame on them for trying to pull a fast one!
RickOctober 15, 2010 at 7:55 am
Thank you, Attorney Ricketts, for coming up with this angle to stop the privatization of our libraries. My family and I do not want our records shared by this “foreign” firm–at the very least! We totally agree, the people of this community were blindsided on this issue. After attending several of our local City meetings, it’s quite apparent that the City Council does not represent the people they were elected to serve. Hearing of the City exploits of the last several years (above), I am quite ashamed of City Management. We will be actively involved in the next elections!