KSFY Screenshot

This of course after the City Attorney advised the same in his testimony today in front of the commission. The city of course blamed Shawn Tornow for bad counsel to the Board and claimed the Board acted in good faith from his counsel. Of course it’s easy to blame a former city employee who is ‘no longer employed by the city’.

Staggers wanted individual reprimands of each board member AND the dates of the private meetings. He got neither request.





Here is a detailed PDF of Kermit’s testimony and city correspondence;


11 Thoughts on “Open meetings commission advises reprimand of SF Ethics Board

  1. Pathloss on November 18, 2010 at 2:14 pm said:

    The one person who should be punished is enjoying a cushy retirement funded by citizens he persecuted for 16 years. You’ll hear even worse about Tornow once cases start at the state level. He’s a traitor to rule of law that should be shamed and disbarred.

  2. Red Ryder on November 18, 2010 at 3:36 pm said:


    I have no idea where you are getting your information but you certainly are dead wrong. Your ability to critically analyze is exceeded only by your ignorance which is quite apparent in your writing. There is an old saying which says something like “It is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than than to open your mouth and remove all doubt”.

  3. Better take your meds Dan. Your city rants really is a broken record

  4. Red Ryder on November 19, 2010 at 4:01 pm said:

    Having obtained Kermit Staggers presentation, is it also possible for you to obtain the various statues and city ordinances involved and publish them? Certainly somebody with 16 years or so of experience based the advice on something solid. Does that not make sense?

    Additionally, who was Shawn Tornow’s supervisor and what were his thoughts on the “poor advice”? He certainly played a role in this and where is he hiding now? Isn’t the “top dog” ultimately responsible for decisions coming out of that office or is he busy just looking for a tree?

  5. RR – You do bring up a good point. When your boss is a former SD SC justice, one wonders? Huh? I also find it ironic that even though assistant city attorney was present at the Open Meetings hearing, she chose not to testify, even though she knew exactly what was going on, and David, new in the job did not. I actually felt kind of bad for David. But to claim Tornow was acting on what his superiors told him is ridiculous. While I am not a fan of the assistant city attorney or the former city attorney, Judge Admunson, I still think Tornow acted alone. Rumor has it that Munson wanted to axe him to, but couldn’t figure out the logistics.

  6. Red Ryder on November 20, 2010 at 12:55 pm said:

    I3wis: You are correct on the assistant city attorney. David, new to his position, could not have known what was going on and, perhaps has not done his homework as thoroughly as he should have. Is David the “front man” for the boss.

    Concerning Tornow’s so called “bad advice”, who makes the final decisions in the City Attorney’s Office? Was he kept informed of that which was transpiring? Is that not also part of his job? Since he is the supervisor, should he not have been aware of what was coming from his office? In my opinion, he certainly ought to have been or is this just another case of “throwing someone under the bus”? If something were incorrect, did it not happen on Admunson’s watch? Where does the buck stop? What exactly did Admunson do for his, what $100,000 or so? Hide? Such being the case, he did and does a good job.

    Not because they are my questions, but I think they do deserve answers by SOMEONE.

    Personally I do not pay much attention to rumors since at the present time, rumors may be circulating about any of us. I can tell you that at the present time there are many rumors circulating about “Our man Mike”, and they are not necessarily good. Just ask some people who are involved in the EVENTS CENTER possible locations, the spending of money, etc.

    Incidentally, what happens now to Darrin? Do we have a public flogging? As a former Council member should he have not known better? Oh that’s right, he’s sorry and with a kiss and a hug, all is well.

  7. Dukembe on November 20, 2010 at 2:56 pm said:

    The former city attorney (Amundson) was a placeholder for Mayor Munson, after he suddenly and quietly shed off the prior city attorney a couple years ago, sending him to some obscure city department. Mr. Tornow was flat wrong, and he was not effectively supervised for his last many years in the office.

  8. “Mr. Tornow was flat wrong, and he was not effectively supervised for his last many years in the office.”

    As I suspected.

    RR – Yeah, as a former city councilor, Smith should have known better.

  9. Red Ryder on November 21, 2010 at 2:57 pm said:


    Let me see, are you really saying that for the past 15+ years or so, Tornow did not have an effective supervisor? Does that seem reasonable and logical?

  10. He had a supervisor? That seems illogical? Seems he did what ever he fucking wanted to. Including eating too many donuts.

  11. Pingback: Kermit Staggers as ‘Cool Hand Luke’ — South DaCola

Post Navigation