Thanks for the really positive note. The simple fact that you say you are starting to think, think, and think is exactly the reason I have been posting on this page so much. My kids think I'm an idiot and jousting with a windmill, and probably a lot of others think so too.
But, this is my town too, and I have pretty much connected my life to this community. You will always see some pettiness, selfservingness, dishonesty, lack of integrity, morals, scruples, and ethics; gladhanding, freeloading, lowlevel graft, and corruption....at all different levels.
But you know what? That is way overbalanced by the kindness, caring, and ovewhelming good character of the majority of the people who live here and the values they live by. That's why it's such a good place to live.
The checks and balances to prevent the former and encourage the latter statements to become reality, is built into the election process and is one of the reasons why the power of the vote is so great, and important. Time and time again, we see small vocal groups controlling the greater community.
For example, let's say that from the pool of eligible voters, candidate "A" and his platform is generally supported by 20%, (a very vocal and aggressive 20%). Candidate "B" and his (or her) platform is generally supported by 50%, and the other 30% just don't care to bother with it.
However on Election Day, Candidate "A" is elected because while 100% of his group votes for him, only 15% of the majority group supporting candidate "B" votes at all, because of this, that, or the other thing... and Voila! We get what we elect.
So! One of my goals is to get people out there and take part. If we live here, don't we owe it to ourselves to think a little, study a little on the issues, and take part in the process? Don't just do your research through rumors floating around, but read, listen, and think. And forthrightly state your opinion. It doesn't matter if you lean left or right.
I bet we could get a lot more done if we pulled together more that way, and the officials who run the community will always be reflective of the majority values of the population.
Sorry....as I said earlier, I am sometimes starting to sound like my high school civics teacher...and I hated that class...
You sure do know alot about this case. Thank you for answering my questions. Maybe you should think of running for some type of office again. You'd have my vote. I know how your always saying that younger people should run but, I'm not young. LOL. And besides some people I have a problem tolerating so...it would never work. But, there a lot of people (like you) in this town who would be great in a Leadership Role. I won't name names but I can think of 5 right off the top of my head. But reguardless, thanks again Randy. You've really made me think, think, think!
Hummm...this case has me thinking. I don't know all the details but I wonder why and to whom he gave this information to. And why only 2. It all sounds pretty dang fishy to me. This is a serious charge if the State is taking it on. But it sounds like the State is ticked and they're going to make an example out of this case to show us...what.... that nobody beats the Law? I ask you, if the 2 people who were named aren't prosecuting then why is the State? I just don't get this. I think the two that were named need to sue him and if he's found guilty then he needs to pay them each no less than 10 grand each and he can never run or be on a board or other any other type of committee again. Or something like that....ya know?
It is my understanding that the two counts are related to the number of "documented" instances in which privileged information was allegedly released to individuals. There may be more; or not. That will develop as the case progresses and more testimony is given. The case might be compounded by the fact that one of the principal witnesses has passed away, along with the investigating officer who was the primary lead. The only person who could probably have grounds for a suit is the alleged victim (and of course Larry Grondahl, if found innocent of the charges) and to date a civil lawsuit has not been an issue; Just accountability and vindication. The state is really the only protection we have for abuse of office, and they take it seriously. The only other recourse an individual would have is a lawsuit which is very expensive, or enough outrage in the general community to vote the abusive individual out office; thus, the States' insistence upon proper political procedures.
Hummm...this case has me thinking. I don't know all the details but I wonder why and to whom he gave this information to. And why only 2. It all sounds pretty dang fishy to me. This is a serious charge if the State is taking it on. But it sounds like the State is ticked and they're going to make an example out of this case to show us...what.... that nobody beats the Law? I ask you, if the 2 people who were named aren't prosecuting then why is the State? I just don't get this. I think the two that were named need to sue him and if he's found guilty then he needs to pay them each no less than 10 grand each and he can never run or be on a board or other any other type of committee again. Or something like that....ya know?
I have been following the case pretty closely. As a former Williston Park Board Member for 12 years, and the Immediate Past President, I still feel closely connected to WPR.
Larry has been charged with 2 counts of Class 'C' Felonies relating to an alleged release of confidential employee information. Both counts were investigated and the North Dakota Burea of Investigative Affairs felt there was enough to warrant the filing of charges.
The case has proceeded past a preliminary hearing, which was referenced in the Herald, to a formal trial.
As within any small town, the rumor mill is rampant. A common misconception is that there is a civil lawsuit. There is not. This is a criminal issue, and the alleged victim actually does not play the primary role at this point. It is the State which is prosecuting; they do not play games. There are any number of other stories floating around. If it were not so serious, it would almost be funny.
Bottom line is....Larry Grondahl is innocent until proven guilty. The question is...did he violate the law? If not, then he should be vindicated. If he did, then he must be held accountable. Simple, no?
What is going on with Larry Grondahl and his trial? All I could get out of the Herald article is that he released some medical information (of his employees?) when he should not have?
Was this some sort of HIPPA violation? I also see that he is running for public office again. Do you think his trial will affect his ability to lead (i.e. just care about baseball programs in Williston)?
__________________
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." -Dr. Johnson
