Psycho Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 ACTING DC ATTORNEY GENERAL PETER NICKLES IS A PIECE OF CAP The American Federation of Government Employees has filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court seeking an injunction to block Acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles from firing eight city lawyers in his office. When talking to voters across the District it seems like nobody likes this bigoted Virginian with right-winged views, and Mayor Adrian Fenty and the DC City Council seem to be blinded to how much Nickles is hated by voters and the damage he will do to the District of Columbia if allowed to stay in his position Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest human_* Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 What's wrong with right wingers? I'm considered by democrats AS RIGHT WING. I'm also considered by Republicans as a moderate. And what has the 8 lawyers done to get the boot? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTING DC ATTORNEY GENERAL PETER NICKLES IS A PIECE OF CAP The American Federation of Government Employees has filed a lawsuit in D.C. Superior Court seeking an injunction to block Acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles from firing eight city lawyers in his office. When talking to voters across the District it seems like nobody likes this bigoted Virginian with right-winged views, and Mayor Adrian Fenty and the DC City Council seem to be blinded to how much Nickles is hated by voters and the damage he will do to the District of Columbia if allowed to stay in his position Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycho Posted June 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Obvious Guest Human you do not read the newspapers or watch the TV news or you would know what these lawyers did or did not do. What's wrong with right wingers? I'm considered by democrats AS RIGHT WING. I'm also considered by Republicans as a moderate. And what has the 8 lawyers done to get the boot? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest human_* Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Naw! You and I just read different newspapers. That's all. To be perfectly frank; I haven't listened to radio in soooooooooo long that I actually forgot how long it's been. In anycase I did google it, and came up with this. It is interesting though. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8052203734.html D.C. Attorney General Fires 11 Staff Members Move Is Part of Effort to Save $3 Million, Reshape Agency By Nikita Stewart Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 23, 2008; Page B01 The D.C. attorney general's office told 10 lawyers and a manager this week that they are being fired to help close a $3 million deficit in the office's fiscal 2009 budget. The cuts are also being made because of the workers' poor performance and as part of an effort to transform the agency into what interim Attorney General Peter Nickles called a "first-rate law firm" with "strong, young, able stars." The purge, Nickles said, is only the beginning and is part of his overhaul of the $101 million operation. Lawyers are required to wear jackets at all times, must submit reports to him each week about their casework and will soon have to clock in and out, he said. "There's been no dress code," Nickles said. "We've had a lot of bluejeans being worn, and that's not appropriate for a professional office." He said that timecards and weekly reports will allow him and his deputies to "get a sense of what people are doing." A performance review process Nickles instituted shortly after he took over the office in December determined the employees identified for termination, he said. Deputies and supervisors looked at "who the stars are and who is not up to that star capacity," Nickles said. D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), chairman of the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, said he supports firing employees who are not up to par. But he said they deserve a proper appeals process, which Nickles said would be followed. Steven J. Anderson, president of the union that represents nine of the lawyers who were fired, said the union plans to challenge the terminations. He said he thinks all of the lawyers had received "satisfactory evaluations." "It may be the way things are done at big law firms," Anderson said. "I don't think it's a good way to run civil service." In addition to the vacancies created by the 11 dismissals, 19 open positions in the office will not be filled in order to meet the $3 million savings goal, Nickles said. A list of the 30 jobs shows that more than a third are for trial lawyers and other workers in the office's public-safety division. Mendelson has criticized Nickles's residence in Virginia, because city employees are required to live in the District. In a May 1 budget report, Mendelson's panel wrote, "The Committee has strong concerns because this is continuing to foster an atmosphere of flux and instability that will certainly have an adverse effect on the agency's employees and operations as a whole." The deadline for Nickles to find a city residence is approaching, but he said he has not decided whether he'll stay in his post. "I have until the end of June to decide," he said. Nickles, a longtime friend of Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's (D), replaced Linda Singer as attorney general in December. Sources said she left out of frustration that Nickles meddled in the business of her office, usurping her authority. The office is responsible for a range of legal issues, including the prosecution of juvenile criminal cases, the enforcement of child-support laws and the negotiation of real estate agreements. Nickles said he thinks morale is up with the changes he has implemented. "If people think I'm moving too fast, too vigorously or in the wrong direction, I hope they can persuade me, because I'm willing to listen," he said. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8051503731.html THE DISTRICT Judge Rejects Deal on Disabled City Had Sought to Put Group Home Lawsuit on Hold By Daniel LeDuc Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 16, 2008; Page B03 A federal judge rejected yesterday a proposed agreement between the District and the Justice Department that would have established programs and deadlines intended to improve health care for the developmentally disabled in the city's group homes. U.S. District Judge Ellen S. Huvelle brushed aside arguments from acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles that litigation hinders efforts to reform medical care, saying, "I've heard similar things over and over again." She ordered attorneys for the group home residents and the District to prepare for a hearing in December. Huvelle ruled in March 2007 that the District had failed to provide adequate health care. Attorneys for residents hope she will order a takeover of the D.C. agency overseeing the developmentally disabled. A special monitor appointed by Huvelle has found continued poor treatment of residents. Some patients have died for lack of care, the monitor, Elizabeth Jones, has reported. Last week, she said residents "remain at very serious risk." Huvelle's rejection of the agreement with the Justice Department was a setback for Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's administration, which had hoped to put the lawsuit on hold while it worked on initiatives, totaling more than $4 million, that Nickles said would show real progress for residents. But the residents' attorneys refused to sign on to the proposed deal between the District and the Justice Department, which had intervened in the case. Attorneys for the residents first sued the District over care in 1976. The suit has slogged on for decades with little improvement trickling down to the hundreds of physically and mentally disabled people in the city's care. Huvelle grew visibly irritated at the efforts by Nickles and Justice Department lawyers, accusing them of "unmitigated gall. She also criticized the agreement, which called for a court monitor to be "sensitive to and respectful of" the District's work and timelines. Huvelle said the agreement between the city and Justice should not dictate the actions of a monitor who works for her. "I will not sign it," Huvelle said. "I will not sign this order that has no monitoring." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycho Posted June 17, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Bravo Guest Human. Now I am go back into the "Quiet Room" here at the state hospital happy. Naw! You and I just read different newspapers. That's all. To be perfectly frank; I haven't listened to radio in soooooooooo long that I actually forgot how long it's been. In anycase I did google it, and came up with this. It is interesting though. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8052203734.html D.C. Attorney General Fires 11 Staff Members Move Is Part of Effort to Save $3 Million, Reshape Agency By Nikita Stewart Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 23, 2008; Page B01 The D.C. attorney general's office told 10 lawyers and a manager this week that they are being fired to help close a $3 million deficit in the office's fiscal 2009 budget. The cuts are also being made because of the workers' poor performance and as part of an effort to transform the agency into what interim Attorney General Peter Nickles called a "first-rate law firm" with "strong, young, able stars." The purge, Nickles said, is only the beginning and is part of his overhaul of the $101 million operation. Lawyers are required to wear jackets at all times, must submit reports to him each week about their casework and will soon have to clock in and out, he said. "There's been no dress code," Nickles said. "We've had a lot of bluejeans being worn, and that's not appropriate for a professional office." He said that timecards and weekly reports will allow him and his deputies to "get a sense of what people are doing." A performance review process Nickles instituted shortly after he took over the office in December determined the employees identified for termination, he said. Deputies and supervisors looked at "who the stars are and who is not up to that star capacity," Nickles said. D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), chairman of the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, said he supports firing employees who are not up to par. But he said they deserve a proper appeals process, which Nickles said would be followed. Steven J. Anderson, president of the union that represents nine of the lawyers who were fired, said the union plans to challenge the terminations. He said he thinks all of the lawyers had received "satisfactory evaluations." "It may be the way things are done at big law firms," Anderson said. "I don't think it's a good way to run civil service." In addition to the vacancies created by the 11 dismissals, 19 open positions in the office will not be filled in order to meet the $3 million savings goal, Nickles said. A list of the 30 jobs shows that more than a third are for trial lawyers and other workers in the office's public-safety division. Mendelson has criticized Nickles's residence in Virginia, because city employees are required to live in the District. In a May 1 budget report, Mendelson's panel wrote, "The Committee has strong concerns because this is continuing to foster an atmosphere of flux and instability that will certainly have an adverse effect on the agency's employees and operations as a whole." The deadline for Nickles to find a city residence is approaching, but he said he has not decided whether he'll stay in his post. "I have until the end of June to decide," he said. Nickles, a longtime friend of Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's (D), replaced Linda Singer as attorney general in December. Sources said she left out of frustration that Nickles meddled in the business of her office, usurping her authority. The office is responsible for a range of legal issues, including the prosecution of juvenile criminal cases, the enforcement of child-support laws and the negotiation of real estate agreements. Nickles said he thinks morale is up with the changes he has implemented. "If people think I'm moving too fast, too vigorously or in the wrong direction, I hope they can persuade me, because I'm willing to listen," he said. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8051503731.html THE DISTRICT Judge Rejects Deal on Disabled City Had Sought to Put Group Home Lawsuit on Hold By Daniel LeDuc Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, May 16, 2008; Page B03 A federal judge rejected yesterday a proposed agreement between the District and the Justice Department that would have established programs and deadlines intended to improve health care for the developmentally disabled in the city's group homes. U.S. District Judge Ellen S. Huvelle brushed aside arguments from acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles that litigation hinders efforts to reform medical care, saying, "I've heard similar things over and over again." She ordered attorneys for the group home residents and the District to prepare for a hearing in December. Huvelle ruled in March 2007 that the District had failed to provide adequate health care. Attorneys for residents hope she will order a takeover of the D.C. agency overseeing the developmentally disabled. A special monitor appointed by Huvelle has found continued poor treatment of residents. Some patients have died for lack of care, the monitor, Elizabeth Jones, has reported. Last week, she said residents "remain at very serious risk." Huvelle's rejection of the agreement with the Justice Department was a setback for Mayor Adrian M. Fenty's administration, which had hoped to put the lawsuit on hold while it worked on initiatives, totaling more than $4 million, that Nickles said would show real progress for residents. But the residents' attorneys refused to sign on to the proposed deal between the District and the Justice Department, which had intervened in the case. Attorneys for the residents first sued the District over care in 1976. The suit has slogged on for decades with little improvement trickling down to the hundreds of physically and mentally disabled people in the city's care. Huvelle grew visibly irritated at the efforts by Nickles and Justice Department lawyers, accusing them of "unmitigated gall. She also criticized the agreement, which called for a court monitor to be "sensitive to and respectful of" the District's work and timelines. Huvelle said the agreement between the city and Justice should not dictate the actions of a monitor who works for her. "I will not sign it," Huvelle said. "I will not sign this order that has no monitoring." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts