If Stringer and Lamberto were in charge of this project, I think it would be a good basis for firing both of them.

You now have this report and the Hueston report at a cost of $495,000.00 dollars and both leave to many questions unanswered.

I have learned in the last 3 years that lawyers suck when it comes to investigations, hopefully so have you.

PLEASE try and use someone who is not so politically correct in their duties when looking for the truth.

How much more money was wasted just interviewing all these people about stupid things, keeping in mind these are all the highest paid county employees, save Ristow herself. I love the footnote, too, about how Ristow’s supervisor’s excuse for tolerating her was b/c if they got rid of her, they’d get no replacement, but yet, as I understand it she did no work, anyway. So b/w the $140,000 they spent on the law firm and another $100,000 (conservatively) in employee hours wasted documenting this crap about her 4 hour lunch and her tattoo, all to discipline a $25-$30,000/year employee? You may as well have just paid her $250,000 to go away, you idiots, and had her sign a confidentiality agreement. Now everyone will know how stupid and frivilous the county is, and hopefully see how far you will to protect Mikey. I guess the endorsement from the law enforcement unions really is that strong, eh?

Reading b/w the lines though, obviously there was a chummy email b/w Ramos and County Counsel Andy Hartzel….thanks Andy, for trying to talk Ristow out of going to the press by pretending you care. Gee, I wonder if Andy had a hand in hiring the outside counsel?

And how did she get her personal cell number?? No way a tech would have that, absolutely no reason for that.

If Ristow lied and the DA’s office is concerned about that, they should be more concerned about Ramos lying in a much greater way than a 4 hour lunch.

And the supervisor who handled that lunch hour issue with Ristow, not now, but you better hope you don’t have double standards on that issue. I see how the supervisor sidestepped that issue when confronted by Ristow.

WOW, such a big deal on tatoos around the DA’s office. They should start a tattoo police division.

Witness interviews very casual, NOT TAPE recorded for accuracy. SHOULD have been video taped spending the money the BOS did. First year law student can have fun with this report.

Should have at least had a stenographer in on this. No real checks and balances for telling the truth. Aggressive interviewing was not on these lawyers agenda. Prior instructions from Stringer?

SOMEONE is going to take the OPINION of two high paid attorneys based on their note taking. NOT!!!!

Ramos’s interview reminds me of Bill Clinton’s deposition. LOL!!!! WHAT a joke.

Sorry BOS members, I could have done better than this at a much cheaper rate, at least the first 45 pages.

People laugh at the Sentinal, IT sure seems folks were jumping around there when the article came out.

Isnt it the law that Board members who have been told about the potential liability become personally liable when future cases occur? Well, Mr Ovitt are you prepared to be personally sued when Ramos continues acting out? You KNOW he cant stop. Ask your crack county counsel about personal liability of elected office holders. Even an incompetent attorney like stringer will tell you that the county CANT pay harrassment damages against a elected.

Is it worth the risk Mr Chairman? Maybe Kirk really does have a plan that will rid the county of the liability posed by Mr Ramos. Since the FPPC referral the Board has nothing to worry about (unless Ramos gets reelected–the watch out!)