Continue the vision KEEP WHIDDEN

[Unregistered]

How to continue and complete the 180 degree turn from where this department was in 2008 - Minor readjustments.

It is foolish to believe a 'new' Sheriff can solve old long entrenched problems - but a new Chief Deputy will go a long way.

Why is it that a highly trained military veteran is pigeon holed, when his talents and leadership could be placed to maximum effect - across an entire agency, and not confined to only one division?

Deputies do not lack confidence in the Sheriff, deputies lack belief in progress - and a new order, is in order.

KEEP STEVE WHIDDEN, but change things up - the stagnation is suffocating.

Dont vote for a new Sheriff, but a new Chief Deputy - change is needed - someone with ability and leadership.

The department as a whole can continue its transition from deplorable to remarkable.

If the Sheriff cannot untie himself from - we must untie ourselves from him.

Garcia has nothing to offer but 'Hope' - When Garcia left the agency, why did he not apply elsewhere?

Basically buying his job through financing a campaign. The boy who would be king?

The argument 'I/He can hire the best qualified experts to manage things' - using business principles to manage a public law enforcement agency - law enforcement is a unique culture where Fortune 500 ideas will not transfer - save the social engineering and management practices for private business, not public safety.

[Unregistered]

Oh we can just imagine who this is. Not.

And he needs to be unemployed not pigeon holed.

But we agree that the current chief deputy is useless as well. Sounds like an internal advertisement to shift blame from Whidden.

Regardless of the issues of whether or not it is the Chief, Captain, Lt, Sgt, or Deputy, let's get one thing straight....

Whidden as Sheriff is responsible period.

End of story.

[Unregistered]

Oh we can just imagine who this is. Not.

And he needs to be unemployed not pigeon holed.

But we agree that the current chief deputy is useless as well. Sounds like an internal advertisement to shift blame from Whidden.

Regardless of the issues of whether or not it is the Chief, Captain, Lt, Sgt, or Deputy, let's get one thing straight....

Whidden as Sheriff is responsible period.

End of story.

Ok, 'who' 'is this' -

If anyone needs to be unemployeed - its you - and the Chief mumbling deputy.

"sounds like an internal advertisement to shift blame from Whidden" - when are you declaring your candidacy to run for Sheriff - what is your expertise? 12 credit hours at Edison on academic probation? Disgraceful, disloyal peasant.

You are a disgrace to your shift and your division.

"Lets get one thing straight" That line work good walking into a 22 at one of the bars? Laying down who 'the boss' is?

Why dont you get something straight, like a handle on your 35k a year, no raise "career".

Lets place your resume against who you feel should be "unemployed" -

You are a waste of leadership effort, move aside for the deserving deputies who are worth training.

[Unregistered]

It certainly is not WHO you think it is Buckwheat.

But that was interesting as an analysis.

Either way, Whidden still is totally, independently "solely", responsible for ALL of it.

As far as my education, I teach at the Academy. Figure it out you are smart.

[Unregistered]

It certainly is not WHO you think it is Buckwheat.

But that was interesting as an analysis.

Either way, Whidden still is totally, independently "solely", responsible for ALL of it.

As far as my education, I teach at the Academy. Figure it out you are smart.

Buckwheat? What about Farina, Alfalfa, Spanky and Darla?

You teach at the academy? Therefore, in your logic somehow establishes you as educated?

What does teaching at the academy have to do with education. Maybe it reflects a lack of such?

Are you too sexy for your shirt?

[Unregistered]

Nope. Wrong again Bucky.

Not as smart as I thought you were. Initially.

[Unregistered]

I care...

really....I do

[Unregistered]

I think changing the Chief would be a very positive move. Since the majority of the issues that have surfaced had to pass through the Chief, he failed to protect the Sheriff. I am sure that the Chief had full authority to act on the Sheriffs behalf and unfortunately failed to choose the correct solution.

That happens. He is human too. So maybe it is time to start fresh.

If that were done, and the officers who failed to do their jobs getting the paperwork to the SAO, would come forward and admit it, we could get back to being professional and thus more experienced in doing our difficult jobs.

Just a thought from the boots on the ground.

[Unregistered]

I think changing the Chief would be a very positive move. Since the majority of the issues that have surfaced had to pass through the Chief, he failed to protect the Sheriff. I am sure that the Chief had full authority to act on the Sheriffs behalf and unfortunately failed to choose the correct solution.

That happens. He is human too. So maybe it is time to start fresh.

If that were done, and the officers who failed to do their jobs getting the paperwork to the SAO, would come forward and admit it, we could get back to being professional and thus more experienced in doing our difficult jobs.

Just a thought from the boots on the ground.

Thank you, sir, or madam. Spoken like a professional.

I am in complete agreement the Cheif did (and does) have the full authority to act on behalf of the (in title) Sheriff.

However, I would choose to slightly diverge from your opinion "the majority of the issues that have surfaced had to pass through the Chief, he failed to protect the Sheriff.... had full authority to act on the Sheriffs behalf and unfortunately failed to choose the correct solution..."

The Cheif completely chose the correct decision - in his myopic, throwback to the 80's mentality - any decision was fine, since it would not be 102 'blamed'. 102 protects only himself, he is along for the ride - already has his retirement set, (go back and look at his financial disclosures from his once upon a time run for Sheriff) - before coming to Hendry, with his ponytail grown out in 'retirement'...

Steve, when you read this for yourself, save the last shot you have at another term - replace 102 with someone bona fide on your side, and the agency as a whole.

102, when you read this, youll probably be mumbling something, but understand this is not personal, its professional - go run the jail, the fleet, but not #2, you arent cut out for it.

Sincerely,

Probably a solid 75% of the agency..

[Unregistered]

For the love of God, it is Chief not cheif. Someone keeps posting it spelled incorrectly. I hate being that guy but please all your answers are very well spoken and logical but you keep spelling it wrong. Thanks.