COPYRIGHT 2022 RICHARD ODOMS
This Website and/or any of its contents, may NOT be printed, photographed, reproduced, copied, recorded, altered, modified or adapted, in
any manner, without the prior written consent of the Webmaster. The entire content of this Website remains the exclusive and sole property
of the Website owner and publisher and is protected under the First Amendment Of The Constitution of the United States of America.
The Following Disclaimer Applies To ALL Webpages Associated With BOTH Of My
Websites & Will Be Updated On Individual Webpages As They Are Encountered.........
Recommended Screen Resolution: 1920 x 1080
THE DELTA SHOW
‘COMMON SENSE 101’
Because Sometimes You Just HAVE To Ask,
WHAT THE HELL IS GOING ON ??
What IS This INSANITY That DEFIES 'COMMON LOGIC' ??
What Has Happened To Our Justice System That It No Longer
Holds Public Officials Accountable For Their
Misconduct And Incompetence ??
If you’re reading this Webpage, chances are from GOOD to EXCELLENT that you’ve been ‘following’ what’s been taking place in the CITY OF HAMBURG (Minnesota) for the past eighteen months. Even MORE likely, you’ve probably been a listener to my weekly Internet Program sometime during the past sixteen years. But ever before that, you probably were aware of my Website about the City where I currently live Hamburg, Minnesota. (See www.hamburgminnesota.com.)
While my experience as a Hamburg City Council Member is another whole other story in itself, what began happening in about September 2019 has ‘morphed’ into a situation that now involves not only the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, JEREMY GRUENHAGEN, but other HAMBURG CITY OFFICIALS as well; including one or more Waconia based MELCHERT, HUBERT & SJODIN Attorneys acting as the ‘contract’ HAMBURG CITY ATTORNEY(s), as well as the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, MARK METZ, the DEPUTY CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, PETER IVY, the MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON, the MINNESOTA STATE AUDITOR’S OFFICE as well as the MINNESOTA LAWYER’S PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD !!
While it is true that most people assume that their elected officials perform their duties ethically and responsibly (and most do); there’s a lot that ‘goes on behind the scenes’ if publicly known, would, at the very least, cause conscientious citizens to question, and even be OUTRAGED, over their actions, tactics and motives of those who participate in ’less than honorable’ behavior.
Yet; they STILL CONTINUE TO BE PAID with OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS.
So it is with the CITY OF HAMBURG and the other Agencies mentioned above. This is 'My Story' detailing what I experienced what I 'called out' HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER JEREMY GRUENHAGEN when he refused to provide me with details about a Civil Lawsuit that was served on the City and then when I 'caught' LYING to me, and preparing a 'phoney document' that (apparently) the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER and his 'co-conspirators' thought I was too stupid to recognize. The more I 'pursued' the information that I was seeking, the more difficult out local PUBLIC OFFICIALS made it (or TRIED to make it) for me to obtain the information that I was seeking. As my 'pursuit' continued and I kept 'digging, it turns out that this is, as you'll learn, MUCH MORE than a 'small town' City Clerk/Treasurer who LIED lied and 'phoneyed up' an OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT, and then thought that they could 'cover up' what took place.
It turns out that THEY are the 'stupid ones'; thinking they can abuse their power and and authority of their ELECTED POSITIONS unchecked to EXPLOIT and 'DUPE' (GO AWAY, OLD MAN) me because I'm seventy-seven years old !! But I'm ALSO a seventy-seven year old retired Law Enforcement Officer who, like any other red blooded American, is DISGUSTED when he sees PUBLIC OFFICIALS ABUSE THEIR AUTHORITY because of their elected or appointed 'position'.
It is NOT NECESSARY for you to thoroughly read all of the information on all of the Webpages relating to this matter (but you certainly may if you wish). With guidance from the state statutes provided, all you REALLY need to do is read the summaries below, and then make a decision as to whether you ‘agree’ or ‘disagree’ with the descriptions of what has taken place, as described, or if you feel that what took place was ‘appropriate’ or ‘inappropriate’, and then, please ENTER YOUR RESPONSES ON THE ‘RESPONSE SHEET’ that you have hopefully already printed out.
Lastly, PLEASE DO NOT respond in a manner that is how you believe that I would like you to respond !! Instead, it is IMPORTANT TO ME, and others, to know the general 'consensus' of HOW OTHER PERSONS FEEL, given the same set of ‘circumstances and actions’ of our elected and other PUBLIC OFFICIALS.
THE DELTA SHOW
‘COMMON SENSE 101’
A brief summary of what’s taken place over the past eighteen months (and has been INTENTIONALLY & TOTALLY IGNORED), is detailed below the following ‘links’; supported by ABSOLUTE, UNEQUIVOCAL documentation of each of the events described, as evidenced by that documentation and appearing on the related Webpages as well as the ’link’s associated therewith:
Please send your thoughts, ideas, suggestions and comments about what is taking place in the small Minnesota City of about 225 households to me at [email protected]. THANKS !!.
Here goes …………
First, let’s begin with the applicable Minnesota Statute, Chapter 609.43:
609.43 MISCONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
A public officer or employee who does any of the following, for which no other sentence is specifically provided by law, may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both:
(1) intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) in the capacity of such officer or employee, does an act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is forbidden by law to be done in that capacity; or
(3) under pretense or color of official authority intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other's person, property, or rights; or
(4) in the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a return, certificate, official report, or other like document having knowledge it is false in any material respect.
ITEM #1: On or about July 31, 2019, the City of Hamburg was served, by the Carver County Sheriff’s Office, with a Civil Lawsuit brought by a former Hamburg City Councilmember and his son. The content of the Civil Lawsuit brought against the CITY OF HAMBURG is ‘public’ information. As a long time Hamburg resident, concerned citizen as well as a former Hamburg City Councilmember myself from 2013 to 2017, I contacted the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, JEREMY GRUENHAGEN, on or about October 15, 2019,
and requested a copy of the Civil Lawsuit.
Later that day, I received a (official City e-mail) response from the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER stating, “Since the City is involved in a pending litigation I will need to confer with our attorney. Once I hear back from them I will provide you with the information that is available to the public.” (I submit as ABSOLUTE EVIDENCE, the ACTUAL E-MAIL send to me. Please scroll down this Webpage.)
On or about October 21, 2019, I received another (official City e-mail) from the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER stating, “Since the pleadings have been filed, you can get them from the Carver County Court Administrator.” (I submit as ABSOLUTE EVIDENCE, the ACTUAL E-MAIL send to me. Please scroll down this Webpage.) THE 'COVER-UP' BEGINS !!
It was later learned from the Carver County District Court Administrator that, in fact; the Civil Lawsuit WAS NOT FILED with the Court until NOVEMBER 1, 2019 !!
The action of the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER by lying and using deceit and deception to delay and withhold a requested copy of the Civil Lawsuit to which a taxpaying resident of the City of Hamburg is entitled, is a VIOLATION of MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43 Subdivision 3.
Based on the information and actions detailed above (and documented elsewhere on this Website), what is your opinion ? Did the Hamburg City Clerk/Treasurer commit violations of Minnesota law stated as stated ?
Yes; I Agree. No; I Disagree.
ITEM #2: Based on the (documented) information stated above, do you believe the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, because he initially stated that “I will need to confer with our attorney”, do you believe that the decision to LIE was his own decision, or was he TOLD TO LIE by one (or more) other HAMBURG CITY OFFICIALS.
I Believe It Was His Own Decision. I Believe That He Was Told To Lie.
ITEM #3: Because they are paid with taxpayer dollars, PUBLIC OFFICIALS are directly accountable to the citizens they serve and MUST always strive to perform their duties in a manner that is consistent with good business practices, manage ‘public funds’ in an honest and ethical manner so as not to bring discredit or dishonor to the position that they hold.
When any allegation, regardless of the nature or seriousness, is made against any PUBLIC OFFICIAL that calls in to question their honesty or integrity or involves real or perceived wrongdoing, the governing body or individual who has jurisdiction over the Public Officer or employee accused, shall immediately upon notification, place the PUBLIC OFFICIAL or employee on an IMMEDIATE ‘Investigative Suspension’, with pay & benefits uninterrupted, and conduct, or cause to be conducted by competent authority, a prompt, complete, thorough and impartial criminal, or other appropriate type of investigation, of the acts allegedly committed by the accused.
If said investigation determines, and evidence is conclusive and supportive that the alleged acts were, more likely than not, committed by the accused, the matter will be referred to the appropriate prosecuting authority for formal charging and criminal prosecution.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #4: If it is determined that other individuals, regardless of who they are or what position they hold, were also involved in any manner or conspired with the accused to commit the misconduct or criminal acts alleged, they, too, will be the subject of a formal, criminal investigation.
If said investigation determines, and evidence is conclusive and supportive that they, too, more likely than not conspired or were involved, in any manner, of the alleged acts, they, too, will be referred to the appropriate prosecuting authority for formal charging and criminal prosecution.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #5: Even though they knew what was taking place involving the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, there was NEVER ANY INQUIRY, by the HAMBURG MAYOR or the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL, into the allegation of MISCONDUCT OF A PUBLIC OFFICER; in VIOLATION OF MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43.
The HAMBURG MAYOR, members of the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL and the HAMBURG CITY ATTORNEY were NEGLIGENT in their duty and responsibility to investigate a complaint of MISCONDUCT by the HAMBUR CITY CLERK/TREASURER. They should be held accountable for FAILING TO ACT in a swift, just, appropriate and decisive manner.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #6: Even though they knew of the allegations made against the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, the elected Officials (Mayor & City Council Members) FAILED TO RESPOND and FAILED TO TAKE ANY ACTION.
In accordance with MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43 (above), do you agree or disagree that the elected City Officials were REQUIRED to initiate an investigation after learning of misconduct allegations of the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER ?
I Agree. I Disagree
ITEM #7: Do you agree or disagree that the elected HAMBURG CITY OFFICIALS should be held accountable for their negligence in not taking any action after learning of alleged misconduct of the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER ?
I Agree. I Disagree
ITEM #8: Even though they knew what was taking place involving the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, they FAILED TO RESPOND or TAKE ANY ACTION !! Instead, the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A 4% SALARY INCREASE for the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TRESURER for the upcoming year of 2020 !!
Doing So Was/Is Acceptable. Doing So Was/Is NOT Acceptable.
ITEM #9: The CITY OF HAMBURG, with only (about) 225 households, also believes it is necessary to employ a part time ‘DEPUTY’ CITY CLERK that works (at last report) only 20-30 hours per week. At the 2019 final City Budget Meeting, instead of providing the part time ‘DEPUTY’ CITY CLERK an increase in her hourly wage, the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL voted instead, to provide her, even though she was ONLY A PART TIME EMPLOYEE, with COMPLETE medical insurance, and PAY THE ENTIRE ANNUL PREMIUM amounting to (about) $6,000.00 ANNUALLY !!
Doing So Was/Is Acceptable. Doing So Was/Is NOT Acceptable.
ITEM #10: If wages are subject to ‘payroll taxes’ and an employee’s medical insurance policy premiums are not, it would appear that the CITY OF HAMBURG is INTENTIONALLY AVOIDING PAYMENT OF PAYROLL TAXES that it would otherwise be REQUIRED TO PAY had the part time ‘DEPUTY’ CITY CLERK been given a wage increase instead of the CITY OF HAMBURG paying the ENTIRE MONTHLY PREMIUM for her medical insurance coverage.
Doing So Was/Is Acceptable. Doing So Was/Is Unacceptable.
ITEM #11: When elected HAMBURG CITY OFFICIALS fail to respond properly or appropriately to allegations of misconduct of a HAMBURG CITY OFFICIAL or employee and it is suspected that the ‘contract’ HAMBURG CITY ATTORNEY is also involved, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY should be notified and conduct a thorough, non-partisan investigation of the misconduct and other allegations.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #12: Even though the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, MARK METZ, was alerted on or about December 20, 2019 of what was taking place in the CITY
OF HAMBURG by one or more of it’s PUBLIC OFFICIALS, he never acknowledged, responded to or took any action after being alerted as to what was taking
place in the CITY OF HAMBURG by its PUBLIC OFFICIALS.
When a COUNTY ATTORNEY, who is the CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER in the County, is notified of actual or perceived criminal activity taking place, he must, in the pursuit of justice and as REQUIRED BY MINNESOTA LAW, respond quickly, appropriately, decisively and impartially; regardless of who is involved.
This lack of action by the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY in response to the information provided to him about potential criminal activity taking place by one or more PUBLIC OFFICIALS of the CITY OF HAMBURG on or about December 20, 2019, is unacceptable.
I Agree. I Disagree
MINNESOTA STATUTE 628.61 dictates under what circumstances a Grand Jury is empanelled:
628.61 MATTERS INQUIRED INTO
The grand jury shall inquire:
(1) into the condition of every person imprisoned on a criminal charge triable in the county, and not indicted;
(2) into the condition and management of the public prisons in the county; and
(3) into the willful and corrupt misconduct in office of all public officers in the county.
ITEM #13: MINNESOTA STATUTE 628.61 REQUIRES that a GRAND JURY SHALL BE EMPANELLED and “…..shall inquire (Subdivision 3) into the willful and corrupt misconduct in office of all public officers in the county.”
Because he REFUSED to empanel a GRAND JURY as REQUIRED above, CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY MARK METZ, HIMSELF, VIOLATED MINNESOTA LAW; specifically MINNESOTA STATUTE 628.61. Additionally, CARVER ATTORNEY MARK METZ, HIMSELF; also VIOLATED MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43 Subdivision 1, above. METZ, and THOSE ASSOCITED WITH HIM, should be REMOVED FROM OFFICE !!
I Agree. I Disagree
From the MINNESOTA GRAND JURY GUIDE:
Minnesota Grand Jury Guide—Page 5 of 26
I. Purpose of Convening a Grand Jury in Minnesota
A. Overview
The primary function of a grand jury is to review evidence presented by a prosecutor and determine whether there is probable cause to return an indictment.
In Minnesota, grand juries perform the following functions:
* Bring charges. Indictments must be used by a prosecutor if the offense charged is punishable by life imprisonment (Minn. Stat. §§ 609.185; 609.385), and may, at the option of the prosecutor, be used in
other cases. Minn. R. Crime. P. 17.01.
* Inquiries regarding prisons and public officials. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 628.61, the grand jury shall inquire into:
* The condition of every person imprisoned on a criminal charge in the county, and not indicted;
* The condition and management of the public prisons in the county; and
* The willful and corrupt misconduct of all public officials holding office in the county.
Likewise, the MINNESOTA GRAND JURY GUIDE (see above) further reiterates and refers to MINNESOTA STATUTE 628.61 SUBDIVISION (3).
ITEM #14: As directed by the statute cited above and the MINNESOTA GRAND JURY GUIDE, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY is REQUIRED to empanel a GRAND JURY because the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, a PUBLIC OFFICER, is accused of misconduct.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #15: For whatever reason, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY is ABUSING his POSITION of TRUST and AUTHORITY and arrogantly believes that he is ‘above the law’ and ISN’T REQUIRED to comply with the appropriate MINNESOTA STATUTES and ‘Rules’ cited.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #16: Failure of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY to acknowledge, respond or take any action upon the receipt of a report of actual, or perceived, criminal activity, or to empanel a GRAND JURY as REQUIRED by MINNESOTA STATUTE, is inappropriate, negligent, dereliction of duty and brings discredit to the Office of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY and embarrassment to the resident of Carver County.
I Agree. I Disagree
609.43 MISCONDUCT OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE.
A public officer or employee who does any of the following, for which no other sentence is specifically provided by law, may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both:
(1) intentionally fails or refuses to perform a known mandatory, nondiscretionary, ministerial duty of the office or employment within the time or in the manner required by law; or
(2) in the capacity of such officer or employee, does an act knowing it is in excess of lawful authority or knowing it is forbidden by law to be done in that capacity; or
(3) under pretense or color of official authority intentionally and unlawfully injures another in the other's person, property, or rights; or
(4) in the capacity of such officer or employee, makes a return, certificate, official report, or other like document having knowledge it is false in any material respect.
ITEM #17: In addition to being a violation of MINNESOTA STATUTE 628.61, the LACK OF ACTION by the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY is also MISCONDUCT OF A PUBLIC OFFICER; in VIOLATION OF MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #18: To preserve the integrity of the Office, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY MUST be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for his nonchalant, indifferent attitude and for his FAILURE to respond in an appropriate, responsible and timely manner.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #19: On or about March 4, 2019, I once again contacted the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY; this time by letter. In my five page letter, I described, in much greater detail, what I had learned and observed taking place in the CITY OF HAMBURG by its PUBLIC OFFICIALS. Additionally, I enclosed copies of numerous, APPROXIMATELY THIRTY PAGES of supporting documents that I had amassed since this whole matter began in approximately October 2019, some NINE MONTHS EARLIER !!
Yet, for a SECOND TIME, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY FAILED to acknowledge, respond to or take any action upon the receipt of a report, and supporting documents, of actual, or perceived, criminal activity taking place in Carver County, or to empanel a GRAND JURY as is REQUIRED by MINNESOTA STATUTE, is inappropriate, negligent, dereliction of duty, brings discredit to the Office of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY and is an embarrassment to the residents of Carver County.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #20: As before and in addition to being a violation of MINNESOTA STATUTE 628.61, the LACK OF ACTION by the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY is also MISCONDUCT OF A PUBLIC OFFICER; in VIOLATION OF MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43.
Once again, as before but now in a more egregious manner, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, has once again, brought shame and ridicule to his profession by VIOLATING MINNESOTA STATUTE 351.14; by committing malfeasance, nonfeasance and misfeasance, for which he must be HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #21: To preserve the integrity of the Office, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY MUST be HELD ACCOUNTABLE for his nonchalant, indifferent attitude and for his FAILURE to respond in an appropriate, responsible and timely manner.
The FAILURE of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY to act in this matter is PARTICULARLY EGREGIOUS because it involves allegations of MISCONDUCT by PUBLIC OFFICIALS; who are paid with TAXPAYER DOLLARS !!
I Agree. I Disagree.
After not receiving any response or acknowledgement to my contacting the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY on or about December 20, 2019 and again on or about March 4, 2020, I began ‘putting the pieces of the puzzle together’ and deduced that the reason that the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY was giving me the “Ostrich had in the sand” treatment was because the very people that I’m figuring out are/were involved, are PEOPLE THAT HE KNEW and WORKED WITH every day !!
Suddenly, everything was quickly ‘coming into focus’. Sharp focus!!
So now, what started out with the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER LYING to me and REFUSING to provide me with PUBLIC information regarding a lawsuit that my taxpayer dollars are partially helping to pay to defend ($42,804.54 as of December 31, 2020), is now involving not only the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, but the 'contract HAMBURG CITY ATTORNEY, and now, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY as well !!
ITEM #22: On or about June 10, 2020 after not receiving ANY acknowledgement, response or seeing any ’action’ being taken as a result of my two previous communications to him, I sent the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY a THIRD LETTER !!
In this latest FIVE PAGE letter to the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, I supplied ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS ‘substantiating’ my allegations of what was taking place in the CITY OF HAMBURG; including my ‘discovery’ of ABSOLUTE PROOF, by his own admission at a City Council Meeting, that the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER admitted THAT HE KNEW, in October 2019, that the lawsuit had not yet been filed with the Carver County Court, as he stated, in a FALSE and FRAUDULENT OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT, that it had been, that same month !!
This voluntary admission, by the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, which he wasn’t smart enough to even realize that he was making, turned out to be the ‘SMOKING GUN’ that ‘cinched’ my allegations against the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER.
But, when I called this to the attention of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, he NEVER ACKNOWLEDGED IT, or any of the other information and supporting documents that I had provided to him!!
While he appeared to ‘want to keep everything quiet', I’m coming up with all of this 'chicanery' that is taking place, and identifying ‘friends’ of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY that are involved !!
In Minnesota (and most likely in other states) lawyers are ‘bound’ by something all the RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT. When the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY exhibits indifferent and arrogant conduct as describe above, if for no other reason than in the interest of justice, his conduct MUST be investigated and be held accountable and sanctioned’, for his atrocious ‘behavior’.
I Agree. I Disagree.
Item #23: In all, it TOOK MORE THAN SIX MONTHS for the CARVER COUNT ATTORNEY to respond to my allegation of MISCONDUCT OF A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE; a violation of MINNESOTA STATUTE 609.43 of the MINNESOTA CRIMINAL CODE !!
This Is Acceptable. This is NOT Acceptable.
At this point, so far we’ve identified the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER, the 'contract' HAMBURG CITY ATTORNEY, and the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY involved. But wait; THERE’S MORE !!
On June 23, 2020, MORE THAN SIX MONTHS AFTER I INITILLY CONTECTED THE CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, I received a letter from ‘DEPUTY’ COUNTY ATTORNEY PETER IVY; a person in the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE that I’m NOT totally ‘unfamiliar’ with. I first learned who he was when I was on the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL from 2013-2016. While serving as a HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL, I had this preponderance of asking ‘WHY’ ? A question that virtually nobody apparently has ever asked before (or probably since).
That’s a whole different story, but the ’end result’ was that the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL wasted $50,000.00 TAXPAYER DOLLARS in their (unsuccessful) attempt to force me to resign my position on the City Council !! While the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER was the ‘catalyst’ behind the effort to remove me, the ’contract’ HAMBURG CITY ATTORNEY, KELLY DOHM, from the Waconia based law firm of MELCHERT, HUBERT & JODIN was ‘right in there pitchin’ along side the other member of the HAMBURG CITY COUNCIL, coming of with all these wild and grandiose 'ideas’ of ‘tactics to try’ that were taking money out of the Taxpayers (Hamburg’s) ’bank account’ and ‘fattening up’ the law firms bank account!!
All the while, I can’t tell you the number of times DOHM said (paraphrasing) “Peter Ivy this, or Peter Ivy that or I’ll talk to Peter Ivy”.
It was really pretty pathetic to watch, hear and experience.
ITEM #24: Speaking of pathetic, in his June 23, 2020 letter (MORE THAN SIX MONTHS AFTER I FIRST CONTACTED THE CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE), the ‘DEPUTY’ CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY stated “…..the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE has no legal authority to investigate alleged crimes." He continues, “…..now that the City Clerk is necessarily a party to the lawsuit, and since the City now has legal counsel, it would be professional misconduct for this office to contact the City Clerk. MRPC 4.2"
The ‘DEPUTY’ CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY also goes on to state, “A grand jury will not be convened in this matter because your letter, in itself, does not constitute probable cause to believe a crime was committed.”
This is nothing more than a nebulous attempt to prevent those PUBLIC OFFICIALS already identified as having committed misconduct from being brought to justice, as well as those other PUBLIC OFFICIALS also involved, from being implicated and also brought to justice.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #25: If, in fact, it is true, as they state, that the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE “...has no legal authority to investigate alleged crimes”, shouldn't the information about alleged misconduct of a PUBLIC OFFICIAL be reported and forwarded to, and investigated by, a competent, qualified authority or jurisdiction ?
I Agree. I Disagree.
THAT NEVER HAPPENED !!
ITEM #26: Additionally, the DEPUTY CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY stated, “A grand jury will not be convened in this matter because your letter, in itself, does not constitute probable cause to believe a crime was committed.”
For the readers information…….
'Probable Cause' requires more than a mere suspicion that a suspect committed a crime, but not an absolute certainty. 'Probable cause' is the legal standard that requires facts or evidence in a given situation that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a suspect has committed a crime and that suspect accused, did, in fact, commit the crime of which he or she is accused. (In Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213, 232 (1983), the Court favored a flexible approach, viewing 'Probable Cause' as a "practical, non-technical" standard that calls upon the factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent men [...] act". (Courts often adopt a broader, more flexible view of 'Probable Cause' when the alleged offenses are serious.)
A ‘more than adequate’ amount of ‘probable cause’ existed and was provided to the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY substantiating that the HAMBUG CITY CLERK/TRESURER committed MISCONDUCT OF A PUBLIC OFFICER. Yet, the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, perhaps because of the identity of those person already identified and who might be implicated in the future, REFUSED to properly, lawfully and judiciously, discharge his duties and responsibilities in a non-partisan manner.
The CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY’s response was wholly irresponsible and totally unacceptable and brought discredit to the Office of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, as well as disgrace and embarrassment to the residents of Carver County.
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #27: Because the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY REFUSED to take any action and used their ‘toolbox’ full of ‘legal gymnastics, manipulation and maneuvers’ as described above, to try and ‘discourage’ my reporting what I observed, witnessed and learned, would you file a complaint with the MINNESOTA LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD ?
I Would File A Complaint. I would NOT File A complaint.
ITEM #28: Because the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY REFUSED to take any action, I escalated what I had found out, to the next ‘level’, the MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE and asked MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON to direct the MINNESOTA BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION to conduct and investigation because, not only of what took place in the CITY OF HAMBURG, but, now; also because of the ‘level’ of the other PUBLIC OFFICIALS involved.
Because the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY REFUSED to investigate the alleged MISCONDUCT OF A CITY OF HAMBURG PUBIC OFFICIAL, would you file a complaint with the MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE asking them to ’get involved’ ?
I Would File A Complaint. I would NOT File A complaint.
ITEM #29: Because of the deplorable and unprofessional manner in which the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY intentionally mishandled a complaint alleging misconduct of a fellow PUBLIC OFFICIAL, a formal complaint was filed with, and numerous pieces of evidence supporting documentation were submitted to, the MINNESOTA LAWYERS PROFESSIONSIBILITY BOARD.
The MINNESOTA LAWYERS PROFESSIONSIBILITY BOARD ruled, WITHOUT THEM EVER EVEN CONTACTING ME, that the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY acted properly in this matter (EVEN THOUGH HE VIOLATED MINNESOTA LAW NUMEROUS TIMES) and that no ‘discipline’ of any kind, ‘was warranted’.
After reviewing all of the evidence and documentation contained in this document as well as contained in the associated Webpages, do you agree, or disagree, with the decision by the MINNESOTA LAWYERS PROFESSIONSIBILITY BOARD ?
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #30: Upon receiving their decision, I exercised my right to appeal the decision of the DIRECTOR of the MINNESOTA LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD.
Based on the facts of this case as described in this document, would YOU appeal the decision of the DIRECTOR of the MINNESOTA LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITYBOARD ?
I Would Appeal. I Would NOT Appeal.
In a five sentence letter and, again; WITHOUT THEM EVER EVEN CONTACTING ME, my appeal was ‘REJECTED’ !!
ITEM #31: Because of the alleged misconduct of the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER described earlier, and the REFUSAL of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY to investigate, let alone take any action, a complaint was filed with the MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENEAL’S OFFICE seeking to have MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON direct the MINNESOTA BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION to conduct a thorough, complete, impartial and unbiased investigation into the allegation of misconduct of the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER. as well as into the intentional and unprofessional manner in which the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY literally VIOLATED THE LAW HIMSELF when he FAILED TO COMPLAY WITH APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA LAWS, STATUTES, the MINNESOTA GRAND JURY GUIDE and the MINNESOTA RULES OF PROFESSIONA CONDUCT.
Given all of the information and facts of what's taken place for OVER THE PAST EIGHTEEN MONTHS involving the HAMBURG CITY CLERK/TREASURER and the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY, would you file a complaint with MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON ?
I Would File A Complaint. I Would NOT File A Complaint.
ITEM 32: Not surprisingly, MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON REFUSED my request and TOOK NO ACTION !!
Do you agree, or disagree, with the decision of the MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL ?
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #33: Upon receiving their decision, as a resident of our Great State, I sent a PERSONAL LETTER to MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON asking him, in the interest of HOLDING PUBLIC OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS, to PERSONALLY INTERVENE and REVIEW the inappropriate acts and actions of BOTH the HAMBURG CITY/CLERK TREASURER and the other HAMBURG CITY OFFICIALS as well as those of the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY and the DEPUTY CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY.
Not surprisingly and (presumably) because of who was involved as well as because of the ‘nature’ of the situation I was reporting and now, because of who else is found to be additionally involved, MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON, as of February 3, 2021, has REFUSED to respond to my second request to him !!
Do you agree, or disagree, with the FAILURE of MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON to respond to and TOTALLY IGNORE my SECOND NOTIFICATION to him about what is taking place in the CITY OF HAMBURG and the CARVER COUNTY ATTORNEY by their PUBLIC OFFICIALS in BOTH jurisdictions ?
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #34: Based on the information your read and the documents that you have viewed on the various Website and Webpages detailing what's been taking place in the CITY OF HAMBURG, do you believe it is appropriate for the 'CITY'S FINANCIAL RECORDS' to be thoroughly reviewed by the OFFICE OF THE MINNESOTA STATE AUDITOR or similar REPUTIBLE fiduciary Agency or Organization ??
I Agree. I Disagree.
ITEM #35: (Optional)
IT'S NO WONDER THERE'S SO MUCH CIVIL UNREST IN OUR COUNTRY AND DEDICATED
LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES
ARE BEING ATTACKED, INJURED AND KILLED.
WHEN PROSECUTORS, SUCH AS MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL KEITH ELLISON AND CARVER
COUNTY ATTORNEY MARK METZ, INSTEAD OF BEING FAIR AND IMPARTIAL, SUCCUMB TO
PREJUDICIAL FAVORITISM OF THOSE WHO BREAK THE LAW BECAUSE OF WHO
THEY ARE OR WHO THEY 'KNOW', IT'S TIME TO "SHUT OFF THE LIGHTS,
CLOSE THE DOOR, PUT THE KEY IN THE LOCK" AND TURN
OUR GREAT COUNTRY OVER TO THE THUGS AND
CORRUPT POLITICIANS.
I Agree. I Disagree.
WANT MORE DETAILS
& INFORMATION ??
