NorthDecoder.com -- North Dakota's Most Influential Political Blog

The Tribune's reporter suggests "the initial felony charges were for the alleged misspending of a little more than $18,000 in funds." I don't know where Crystal Reid gets her information. That sounds like part of Sandy Blunt's argument, but it's not-so-much based on reality. If you go back and look at the original charges against Sandy Blunt, what you'll see is this:

Where, in that document, does it say Blunt was charged with "misspending a little more than $18,000 in funds"? It doesn't. So why does the Tribune's writer say that it's there if it's not?

I think there are only two possiblities: Either (a) the Tribune has an agenda here. The Tribune may be trying to make it look like the States Attorney's office is doing something fishy, when it's pretty much business as usual over there; or (b) the writer might not understand the subject matter about which she's writing. That's always possible, too. A responsible journalist who didn't understand the subject matter might have called someone who does, and asked questions. But this is the Tribune we're talking about. I can't think of a third option.

WayneS said:

Reporter Confused
It is not uncommon for a reporter to not understand what they are writing about. Our fine Fargo Forum recently had an article that said the County Dept where I work was going to have a funding cut of over $100k when in fact what was said at the Board Meeting was that the County would need to fund that amount because of a cut in State funding. Talk about getting people up in arms as it would have meant at least a couple of positions would be eliminated.

November 11, 2008, 07:57 PM
Votes: +0

S. Fred Wood said:

	ND atty gen won't give opinion on Blunt payment http://www.jamestownsun.com/ap...=D94F37900
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2008, 10:05 PM
Votes: +0

What the Heck said:

	Whaaat? No opinion? Beyond the scope of his office? And the Jamestown press is the only news coverage. No one seems to notice that the henhouse has been emptied.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2008, 11:47 PM
Votes: +1

Chet said:

	The Letter Seems to me like this doesn't take a fact finding. Blunt himself says he resigned before the agreement was drafted. Who's disagreeing with him? Anyway. Click here to read the letter.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 15, 2008, 12:06 AM
Votes: +1

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

	... I do NOT understand the issue of what is in question, either Sandy Blunt "quit", or was "fired" either way by state law he is not entitled to a severance package. My question is if he is convicted of this, should not the board members be charged with the same law violation? It seems they decided to ignore state law too.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 15, 2008, 07:07 PM | url
Votes: +1

intheknow said:

	... Don't lump all the board members in the lawsuit. Two of them voted a resounding "NO" to the package.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 15, 2008, 10:05 PM
Votes: +3

iwofndadvocates.com/blog said:

	... Who said anything about a lawsuit? I am talking criminal charges against the board that approved this hush money.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 16, 2008, 07:52 AM | url
Votes: +1

nimrod said:

	Donations? I was at Altru Hospital yesterday. In the lobby, there is a large plaque identifying "Workforce Safety and Insurance" as the donor of over $100,000 to the Altru Health Foundation. Since when do quasi-governmental agencies make charitable donations?
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 18, 2008, 03:16 PM
Votes: +0

Pathetic, just pathetic said:

...
I'm talking about the surplus of WSI in the latest AG opinion. Yeah, we've always known its been there but in the light of all the ongoing and sickening WSI problems, it just pisses me off even more. We've got the politicians of this state (not all, but many of them had their blinders on at the last session when it came to WSI), the leaders of this state, and WSI current and past authority heads with dirt on their hands - big-time. smilies/angry.gif

Why can't anyone get it right? It just torques me that WSI gives out yet another big multi-million dollar dividend to the employers of this state. Let's see, what about putting that money to better use - how about safety education programs for employees and employers across the state (not these crap grant programs either) and last but not least, how about helping our injured workers get back on their feet. There could be better benefits, more education programs available so they can get a job not just some voc rehab crap plan they are supposed to comply with, there could be more of everything for them. Isn't that what WSI is supposed to be there for anyway? Helping them in time of need?

Here we have past and current WSI officials earning huge, unwarranted salaries and for what? What have they done that is so rewarding? The only thing most of them have done is brown-nose, take care of their pet employees, and reak havoc at WSI. They have been troublemakers and no one has done a damn thing about them. Why is that? And, yeah, nimrod, what is it with the plaque at Altru?

Maybe I am out of line saying this and don't crucify me for it, but if I were king for a day I would trade 3 for 1 pronto. I would give up Blunt on the hot seat for this business that we don't know how it is going to turn out or what other dirty little secrets will come out - I would give him up for the bad three people that are still on staff at WSI. For sure. They need to go and they have needed to go for a mightly long time. With those three people still on staff (their names have been mentioned here before so people know who they are), WSI will always be a sinkhold where a bright future, fairness, and justice just continue to get sucked down the toilet. They have sucked the life out of the entire WSI structure and they hold a lot of the blame for the horrible work environment thrust upon WSI employees and they did not make any effort to make things better. Get rid of those three. I sure hope that people watch the salaries closely at WSI in the coming weeks. If they sneak through salaries that are unwarranted that just proves the point even more so of their corruptness. I hope people rally the legislators for a restructuring at WSI so the bad three can be shown the door through a restructured org chart. Let them fend for themselves in this economy. Let them feel what others have felt, that being injured workers and WSI misteated employees as well. Those people who have caused so much damage to WSI are a disgrace. How can they stand to look at themselves in the mirror every day. They know what they have done throughout the years.

November 18, 2008, 07:08 PM
Votes: +10

Spaz said:

	3 Amigos I think I know the 3 you're talking about and I agree. I would take that trade. Blunt did some bad stuff but I think in his heart he felt like he was doing the right thing (even if the little people didn't understand his motives). The 3 I'm thinking are motivated by power, money, and corruption at all costs. That's no way to run an agency.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 19, 2008, 09:36 AM
Votes: +1

leo said:

	Spaz In his heart, Hitler felt like he was doing the right thing.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 19, 2008, 12:00 PM | url
Votes: +1

Joe said:

	... The two who voted no, Curl and Grossbauer, wanted to give Sandy Blunt six months' severance instead of eight. Boy, that makes them saints, don't it.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 21, 2008, 09:03 PM
Votes: +1

What the Heck said:

To Joe
If Curl and Grossbauer had all the facts, like Blunt may have resigned behind closed doors minutes before the vote was taken and that would have made him ineligible for a severance package or was possibly illegal, they would have voted NO and authorized ZERO payment. Some of the board, Gjovig and Indvik excepted, might have been concerned about following the law. In fact, there might have been discussion first. Or maybe an attorney worth their salt might have said, I'm sorry, he's ineligible for ANY severance package. WSI board members have never been fully informed of the facts. Even when they are, you gotta wonder what some of them are thinking. If they had any sense at all, there would be heads rolling. How many times do they have to be embarrassed? Maybe this is one of the reasons Eichoff didn't want another term on the board.

November 22, 2008, 08:27 AM
Votes: +1

Truth said:

...
This is not the first time that "select" board members had information that others on the board didn't and by the way they board operated they wanted to have a unified board votes to present to the public. Certain minions with no minds (Indvik, Mandigo, Ripplinger, Weist, Gjovik) were fed the information and persuaded the others to speak. I don't understand why they schedule 3+ hours for board meetings as there is never any discussion of anything at these meetings and all votes appear to unamimous. So Curl and Grossbauer (who are not part of the "elite" kiss the behind of the CEO club) were not given all the information and were basically LIED to by Gjovik and Indvik about the Blunt RESIGNATION.

If I recall isn't this a pattern with getting rid of CEO's - didn't one of the board members question what happened with Edison as well and made it known that he did not have all the information to make a decision. Lets see who was in charge the, it was PLOW BOY INDVIK.

WSI is corrupt

November 22, 2008, 06:12 PM
Votes: +2