Card games
City commissioner wants $25 million because he did not receive business cards
By André Coleman 01/28/2010
Activist Jon Brookhart was apparently deeply hurt when he didn’t receive business cards after being placed on the Code Enforcement Commission by District 1 City Councilwoman Jacque Robinson in 2007.
As a matter of fact, Brookhart’s feelings were so bruised by the slight that he filed a claim against the city of Pasadena for $25 million, citing mental stress, personal damages, fraud and alleged criminal conduct as the grounds.
On Monday, the council discussed the claim, usually the first step in the filing of a lawsuit, but reported no action being taken.
The claim names the council, City Attorney Michele Beal Bagneris and City Manager Michael Beck as the sources of Brookhart’s problems. City officials have 45 days to respond to the claim.
Brookhart did not return calls for comment.
Members of the Code Enforcement Commission would not discuss the case because of the possibility of litigation.
DIGG | del.icio.us | REDDIT
It makes me wonder ... what's the political statement being advertised here? Perhaps it's that the U.S. dollar is being so horrifically devalued by the Federal Government that only twenty-five million of them can potentially retain a reasonable value capable of purchasing the amount of tissue paper needed by this woefully assaulted commissioner so he can mitigate his -- current and future -- tragedy-incurred tears.
Better yet, why doesn't the City Council just give him 25 million business cards?
As it is, doesn't such positions, to which Mr. Brookhart was appointed, incur some kind of publicly financed allowance, stipend, or other caveat of reimbursement for the optional purposes of purchasing such ego-driven, civic badges of self-advertisement? Or does he just feel that such a mundane labor as actually having to personally produce the purchase of his own business cards so severely besmirches his more aristocratic self-assessment that only a publicly-financed, grievance-claim lottery could possibly assauge Mr. Brookhart's own damaged self-delusions?
Who knows? But perhaps Mr. Brookhart should contact the Weekly (or maybe -- considering his own perceived self-presumptions of opulent aristocracy -- the Star-News for it's "journalistically" more advanced K-Y applications) in order to explain to the more commonly near-bankrupt Californian why they should even remotely consider high-financing the Brookhart family's pie-in-the-sky fantasies?
Or perhaps this is one of those circumstances where a settlement will be preferred by the City because any long-term litigation would end up costing more?
Or how about a circumstance of "Good-ole-Boy-ism"? Is this how somebody in City Councilwoman Jacque Robinson's office uses public funds in order to "reward" a political insider?
Certainly, something ain't right here.
DanD