Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Eugene weekly. (Eugene, Oregon) 1993-current | View Entire Issue (Dec. 20, 2012)
NE W S >>> CONTINUED FROM P. 6 BRO’s strategy in the short term is hyper local. “Our position is that we’re not looking to the courts to win the freedom to marry,” Buchert says. “We’re doing the work that we need to do: the grassroots organizing and hav- ing the conversations we need to have with our friends and family about why marriage matters in Oregon.” — Shannon Finnell FORMER COUNTY ATTORNEY FILES WHISTLEBLOWER SUIT A former county attorney has fi led an intent to sue Lane County for wrongful termination, retaliation for the exer- cise of First Amendment rights for speaking out on matters of public concern and for whistleblowing. A tort claim no- tice letter that was hand-delivered to County Counsel (and District Attorney) Alex Gardner Oct. 29 says that Marc Kardell was fi red after he raised concerns about misuse of county funds and the actions of County Administrator Liane Richardson that were causing “a multitude of prob- lems” within the county. Kardell, whose cases for the county as part of the Land Management Division (LMD) included representing it against controversial Parvin Butte miner Greg Demers, also fi led a complaint on Nov. 14 against the county in Lane County Circuit Court for not responding to a public records request and failure to respond to a request for a personnel record in a timely manner. Kardell’s tort claim notice says that when he raised concerns about the way Richardson and others were con- ducting county business, “particularly the multiple inves- tigations that lacked legitimate bases and were costing the taxpayers actual dollars as well as lost productivity and loss of county personnel, he was summarily escorted out the door with no notice under the guise of a ‘layoff.’” Richardson spent at least $24,000 in investigations against progressive commissioners Pete Sorenson and Rob Handy. Her allegations against the commissioners, which included voting against her, talking to the media and in Handy’s case, having negative body language and facial expressions, were deemed unfounded by an outside inves- tigator. The tort claim notice letter from Kardell’s attorney Margaret Wilson says that on April 6, 2012, Richardson chastised him for offering to contribute to a gift for the de- parting county information offi cer, Amber Fossen. County EARLY DEADLINES 8 emails obtained by EW support this allegation. Also around April 6, Kardell emailed the county board chair, per county policy, about an “inappropriate comment” made to him by one of Richardson’s staff members. On April 11, Gardner informed Kardell that the county would be investigating him for reasons including Richard- son no longer wanting him “to perform work for her offi ce.” Gardner himself is also implicated in the document. The letter says that at one point Gardner intervened and prevented Kardell from refusing a 5 percent step increase in pay. The letter says Kardell refused the increase because of the county’s fi nancial diffi culties. The refusal was ap- proved by Human Resources, but Gardner blocked it “opining that Mr. Kardell simply wanted to ‘look good’ in front of the Board of Commissioners.” Kardell then do- nated what he estimated would be the net pay raise, $3,100, to the county. The letter also addresses Kardell’s communication to the county board and Gardner in regard to budget issues surrounding the employment of another attorney in the offi ce, Stephen Vorhes. Kardell’s email, written from his private account and on a day off work, expressed concern over cuts in LMD and asked the board to wait on a six- month review of the department before changing the status of “valuable members of the offi ce.” Vorhes, who in the past had served as acting county counsel, was apparently asked to retire. Attorneys and members of the public wrote the county opposing the cuts. The public records suit is requesting documentation from the county supporting the reasons for Kardell’s lay off. Kardell has been asking for the records since early September, the suit says. When asked for comment on the case, the county re- sponded, “It’s Lane County’s long-standing practice not to discuss either litigation that has been fi led, po- tential litigation that may be fi led or personnel matters. Any response by county will be as part of legal proceed- ings or the appropriate personnel hearing or arbitration.” — Camilla Mortensen IS THE LTD BUS WATCHING US? Smile: You’re on camera all over Eugene these days. Do a Google search for “Eugene webcam” and you’ll fi nd cameras fi lming public spaces from the UO to the Owen Rose Garden. A recent revelation that Lane Transit District (LTD) had looked into not just videoing but also audio re- cording individual conversations on Eugene-area buses has local defenders of civil liberties concerned. A Dec. 10 story on The Daily that was picked up by Wired.com revealed that LTD had send out a request for proposals that sought “microphones capable of distilling clear conversations from the background noise of other voices, wind, traffi c, windshields wipers and engines.” According to the story, LTD requested a minimum of fi ve audio channels spread across each bus, and “each audio channel shall be paired with one or more camera images and recorded synchronously with the video for simultane- ous playback.” Andy Vobora, LTD spokesman, says that the story cited a request that was not fulfi lled, and the buses still only have two mics, not fi ve — one for the driver and one for the rest of the bus. Vobora says LTD has been video and audio recording for several years and has a sign at the front of the bus announcing that. He says the reason for increasing the mics was in order to monitor if “something going on that violated someone’s rights” and cited examples of accusa- tions of racism of sexual harassment that without audio cannot be substantiated. He says that the “vast majority of bus riders appreciate knowing we have that [recording] capability when some- thing comes up.” Attorney Lauren Regan of the Civil Liberties Defense Center is concerned about the mic request. She says, “It is really unfortunate that people, particularly lower income people who really have no choice but to use public trans- portation, are basically coerced into giving up their rights to privacy while using that resource.” Regan says those concerned about surveillance are of- ten told, “If you’re not doing anything wrong, then you shouldn’t care.” But she says, “If we don’t assert our right to privacy and right to live in a state where the government is not constantly monitoring its people for whatever reason then we lose those rights.” She disputes the idea that “Big Brother” monitor- ing people when they go out in the public domain makes people safer, calling it Orwellian: “It’s not about keeping us safe because nobody is live monitoring that feed.” Re- gan says her guess is that LTD called for the mics because, “This is something they can tell their mega-insurance com- pany they are doing and lower insurance rates.” That’s trading the right to privacy for the fi nancial bot- tom line, she says. Vobora says that in response to recently voiced con- cerns, LTD is looking into increasing signage and putting information into bus newsletters, particularly during times such as the beginning of the school year when ridership increases. — Camilla Mortensen Christmas and New Year’s Day fall on Tuesday this year, which totally messes with our deadlines for the next two issues. We go to press on Mondays instead of Wednesdays these weeks, though we hit the streets as usual on Thursdays. Please reserve ad space as early as possible for our Dec. 27 and Jan. 3 issues. Questions? Call 484-0519. Thanks and happy holidays from all of us at EW. December 20, 2012 • eugeneweekly.com
