Comments on: Ada Sheriff And Commish Trade Barbs

By: Concerned Neighbor

Concerned Neighbor — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 22:55:54 +0000

@Erico49 – Dan and CLB are still around though quieter because Beiter was booted. There were also a lot of trolls attacking and it wore people down.

@David – term limits in other states ended up handing more power to the parties and less individual responsibility to politicians. I think the parties are the problem.

Thought about Bartlett’s raise – if it was irregular then it should have been denied by the commissioners that are now complaining about it.

By: Erico49

Erico49 — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:55:21 +0000

Concerned taxpayer..I miss Dan. What’s he up to?

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 15:51:55 +0000

Rick Visser, I am a republican and a former Ada county employee. A leader would have notified the sherriff to let him know his opinion on the issue. This is good cousel for not only you but also the sherriff. This type of jr high name calling makes me not want to vote for either of you. Also an elected official should have enough poise to not leave comments on comment boards. That makes me want to vote for you even less

By: Ada County Taxpayer

Ada County Taxpayer — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:20:26 +0000

When is a secret action OK? When is a lack of transparency OK? The WAY the sheriff sought a raise that was 100% greater than the other Ada County employees got got was not open and transparent. Yes, the WAY Sheriff Bartlett sought his raise is an issue. Openness in government requires being as open and transparent in ones role as a public servant. However Sheriff Bartlett sought and got his raise deserves an investigation. Dan Popkey, are you available?

By: Rick Visser

Rick Visser — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 14:04:43 +0000

Easterner, Please read the opinion, especially Judge Bail’s part seeking clarity from Supreme Court. Or, ask Betsy Russell of IPT. Betsy was part of the lawsuit and she should understand the part of the ruling that Judge Bail and Commissioner Visser agree needs clarification. That’s the only reason I favored an appeal – to get guidance from the Supreme Court. I agree with every part of Judge Bail’s decision.

By: David

David — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 02:26:12 +0000

Bring back term limits via constitutional (voter approved) amendment. This amendment would limit members of the state House to serving twelve (12) years, or two terms in office. Members of the state Senate would be limited to serving twelve (12) years, or two terms in office. The Secretary of State, State Treasurer, State Controller, Judges and the Attorney General would be limited to ten (10) years, or two terms in office. Other state officials and local governing body members would be limited to ten (10) years, or two terms in office.
Appointment to an office for any amount of time would be equal to one (1) term.
There should also be a set salary ($12,000 / annual) for all offices in the state Legislature and all expenses incurred (rent, lunches, etc.) during the term must be paid from that salary.
There can be no retirement from any public office, state, or local governing body.

EDITOR NOTE–The impossible obstacle is that there is no mechanism for citizens to initiate an amendment. Only through a 2/3 vote of both houses and then a simple majority of voters can the state constitution be amended. Not many politicos will vote themselves out of office!

By: Concerned Neighbor

Concerned Neighbor — Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:13:46 +0000

Sheriff Bartlett has been direct and polite. I have far more trust in police delivering a legal decision than any lawyer.

Visser has been vicious and condescending in every communication. Add on that lawyers will manipulate these types of summons like they did with the RIAA/MPAA abuse automating lawsuits against kids and grandmothers then you should easily see why no one in their right minds wants to give them the power of judge and jury.

I’ll remember both when it is time to vote.

By: Easterner

Easterner — Sun, 23 Feb 2020 21:54:54 +0000

Commissioner, your statement makes no sense.

You say, Judge Bail sought clarity from the ISC (‘you agreed’ as if you are the County counsel) and she received it. Fine.
She rules against the County and rather CLEARLY so.

Then the Commissioners took a vote whether to appeal the decision.

You solely voted to appeal the decision.
Ignoring the CLEAR message from the judge AND the facts of the case.
“Hey let’s appeal and maybe we’ll win on a lucky day, despite it wasting MORE money”.
That all relates to your personal attack of the sheriff ‘wasting money’ and being nontransparent, and lack of team communication.

Dear Commissioner,
Why do you support this bill that favors collections attorneys & bankruptcy attorneys?
Which in turn may show why you oppose the Sheriffs’ (Association) support of it.

The issue is NOT the sheriff’s pay increase- it is WHY are two principals of the county at odds with each other on something that affects the sheriff’s office, and it can’t be a blue/red opposition this time.

Given the history of county officials lack of cooperation, something like this rolls around come election time.

By: Rick Visser

Rick Visser — Sun, 23 Feb 2020 21:06:29 +0000

Easterner,
First, be open and share your name and email address.
Second, does the current law affect you $$ in any way?
Third, I have never received one cent from a garnishment or other legal action. I have worked and volunteered for the non-profit Idaho Innocence Project since 2008.
Fourth, the efficiency of the new law and the route of a no-fee online option is what attracted to me to the new bill.
Fifth, Easterner, what has your research revealed about unnecessary fees from a sheriff’s office? Silence, are you a sheriff, related to one or employed by an SO? That would be bias.
Waiting for your name ….

By: Rick Visser

Rick Visser — Sun, 23 Feb 2020 19:59:09 +0000

Dear Easterner,
Please look into (I.e. research) that I wanted to appeal the public records decision on only one ruling by Judge Bail – the lack of direction by the Idaho Supreme Court on attorney client privilege. Judge Bail sought clarity from the Idaho Supreme Court and I agreed with her. I am 100% for transparency and openness and Bartlett’s sneaky way of requesting his raise is deplorable.Just a month earlier he could have included in his budget request (like 0ther elected officials have), but he chose not to. Even one of the commissioners who approved his raise noted on the record that she was not pleased with the way the Sheriff sought his raise.