The question raised by Kirsh so poignantly is simply: Was there a legal duty that McEachran owed the Council, that he did not fulfil?

I have never, ever heard a definitive answer to this question. Nor can I find anywhere whether this legal issue was even asked of someone who is trained in law and unbiased. The Prosecuting Attorney is a powerful position, and expecting him to be held to the highest standards, when he is holding people to high standards everyday, is important when it comes to the public’s trust of government.

In today’s world there are many who owe us the “Duty of Care” that have let us down. If we do not enforce it, we will continue to be let down. Whether it is Wall Street, Main Street, or our government emplyees, I think all should be held accountable, regardless of position, don’t you?

I believe that McEachran owed the County Council the legal “Duty of Care”, which is part of his fiduciary duties, and he failed to exercise this duty of care when letting Kremen know how to get his pay raise, in contravention of the Council’s known disapproval.

Did McEachran owe the Council a fiduciary duty? If so did he fail to exercise this duty? Is a fiduciary duty important?

So far I have not been able to find where any of these questions have either been simply asked, nor answered.

Definition of Fiduciary Duty: When one person does undertake to act for another in a fiduciary relationship, the law forbids the fiduciary from acting in any manner adverse or contrary to the interests of the client, or from acting for his own benefit in relation to the subject matter. The client is entitled to the best efforts of the fiduciary on his behalf and the fiduciary must exercise all of the skill, care and diligence at his disposal when acting on behalf of the client.

The client in this case was the County Council. The Prosecuting Attorney is the Council’s Attorney, not Kremen’s.

Does it look like McEachran followed this duty above in the Kremen secret pay raise case?

It would be nice seeing as how this pay raise and the resulting increase in retirement benefits may amount to over a $100,000 dollars, that a qualified and impartial attorney look at the situation, to see if the public was being served by those who had a “duty” to do so.

Did our Prosecuting Attorney exercise the duty that he owed to the Council?

Simple question.

Do you have an answer?

~

Mr. Kirsch’s article makes some valid points. it may be that our McEachran has breached his fiduciary duty to the Council and lined Kremen’s pocket with a substantial amount of the taxpayers monies.

The prosecuting attorney is good at pointing out when criminals fail to abide by the law, but I am wondering whether the opposite is true.

Courage and duty are rare things indeed, these days.

AFY!!

I don’t understand. You will read the NY Times, but not the NW Citizen, even though one has local impact. Mr. Kirsh’s piece on Kremen is an excellent editorial.

Do you have your fingers in your ears, or what? A monopoly attitude.

Now if Obama, who is somewhat of a rookie when it comes to foreign policy and military intelligence, would have only picked a CIA director with some “intelligence” experience, anything, I would feel safer. Sarah Palin has more foreign policy experiance than Panetta. I know, its different for if you are a man. Two rookies when we are at war, is irresponsible and is caving to the left who do not fear the dangers that lurk out in the real world.

Nice hard hitting Editorial on the Kremen/McEacheran self serving pay raise. This is what a real Editorial looks like. Link: http://www.nwcitizen.us/ Good article on the new jobs at the Fairhaven Shipyards. New family wage paying jobs, no taxpayer subsidy, expanded the tax base.

Can’t find either story in the Herald.