Denied with a twist, see at Exposed we know who is sending the denials and to the board we wanted to let you and the rest know Lisa Peterson is the one actually sending CORA to Ted and actually copying Ted on it as will be shown right here.
After I demonstrate the truth lets see how the agent of law ENFORCEMENT reacts to watching the lie being perpetrated by ORD who is the one who actually denied the request with Ted being copied. We are not sure how to print the entire thread so please bare with us. Presenting evidence and proof any good cop can see.
The IP address as shown in our trail is coming from 220.127.116.11 that is a local IP address. don’t believe us follow these simple instructions and you to can find the trail.
Open up outlook or any email on the down arrow on the right side you can open up and view what is called “view message source” then right click on it and batta bing batta boom. You can see who and were the message came from and who started it. This example shows Woodmen Hills not Ted Bendelow is sending the denials from WHMD not Ted in this instance. So Lisa Peterson is messing with CORA in this instance not TED so to the cop on the board put on your big boy pants and do the job you said you came here to do cause we know the ladies want to and Lukins and Reiter will not cause they are friends and buddies with the clique.
Pay attention class this is a lesson in why Peterson is trying to get a rise out of me and the board is allowing her do just like that. Ladies of the board here is proof and one particular person doesn’t want to “ruin” lives but its ok to screw with Mr. Pace.
Oh in case you forget this it what evidence of the games people play and this is not the first time Peterson has taken the request and twisted it to get the denial effect.
Mr. Pace,From your lengthy response e-mail, it appears that you’re asking for information concerning the number and type of contracts that WHMD has executed in at least the past 7 years, suggesting that WHMD provide you a list of all such contracts.Under CORA, “Public records” means and includes all writings made, maintained, or kept by the state, any agency, institution, a nonprofit corporation incorporated pursuant to section 23-5-121(2), C.R.S., or political subdivision of the state, or that are described in section 29-1-902, C.R.S., and held by any local-government-financed entity for use in the exercise of functions required or authorized by law or administrative rule or involving the receipt or expenditure of public funds.” C.R.S. § 24-72-202(6)(a)(I). And, CORA provides that, “’Writings’ means and includes all books, papers, maps, photographs, cards, tapes, recordings, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics.” C.R.S. § 24-72-202(7).
WHMD does not have a list of all contracts it has executed in the past 7 years. It is not obligated to create and provide you with such a list under CORA.This Completes your request.
Read the highlighted portion of what was sent via Lisa Peterson in the denial, to be Boston, I never “F” in asked for a “list” of any kind and this is the kind of shit I have had to put up with for 6 years. I am considering my next move right now and maybe if cause a big enough commotion the FBI will come down and ask me what the hell is going on.
So to the one board member who is dead set on being part of the boys club, now is not the time to do it and have you figured out why? Messing with people is not in the job description for a director. Still think Ron is just a pain in the ass?
Denied, Denied, Denied is all we got, one redaction and nonresponse to waive fees by the board for records as I asked and they didn’t address it.
Heck to waiving the fees why didn’t the new board just tell Ted to cough up the ledgers without redaction? Well as I said we are going to get those ledgers, 1099’s and w-2’s one way or the other.
In a matter of 1 hour Exposed received most of the open CORA requests from ORD AKA Lisa Peterson via a game we call hide the records. See ORD is the email we send the CORA to and Lisa Peterson then forwards the items to Bend e low and he processes (denies) the requests. We will post them with the corresponding emails sent by Bend o….. in due time.
Here are the latest CORA responses complete what email trails because we are transparent.
Right out the gate and the lawyer via the board are denying the release of emails as we learned Ted and Lisa either did this on their own or got orders on this and direction from the new board because we copied them all on it. On July 7th 2018 we asked for simple emails from Lisa to the board and vice versa we said it then and now is this this kind of transparency you expected when you voted, right? We let the votes and public see the facts not just or opinion. If they claimed it is protected they are to provide a log of the emails sent if the requestor wishes to take it to court. Ted and Lisa once again proved transparency is a fluid concept, let’s keep going shall we.
In a second email sent 1 hour and 15 minutes later Mr. Ted sent this tidbit to fall back on.
C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3) provides that, “The custodian shall deny the right of inspection of the following records, unless otherwise provided by law… Trade secrets, privileged information, and confidential commercial, financial, geological, or geophysical data, including a social security number unless disclosure of the number is required, permitted, or authorized by state or federal law, furnished by or obtained from any person.” C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3)(a)(IV).
The exception made in subsection (3)(a)(IV) for “privileged information” incorporates the common law deliberative process privilege. The purpose of the privilege is to protect the frank exchange of ideas and opinions critical to the government’s decision-making process where disclosure would discourage such discussion in the future. Thus, material prepared by a governmental employee is not subject to disclosure if the court finds that the material is both predecisional and deliberative and that disclosure would be likely to adversely affect the purposes of the privilege and stifle frank communication within an agency. City of Colo. Springs v. White, 967 P.2d 1042 (Colo. 1998). C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3) also provides that, “The custodian shall deny the right of inspection of the following records, unless otherwise provided by law…Records protected under the common law governmental or “deliberative process” privilege, if the material is so candid or personal that public disclosure is likely to stifle honest and frank discussion within the government, unless the privilege has been waived. The general assembly hereby finds and declares that in some circumstances, public disclosure of such records may cause substantial injury to the public interest. If any public record is withheld pursuant to this subparagraph (XIII), the custodian shall provide the applicant with a sworn statement specifically describing each document withheld, explaining why each such document is privileged, and why disclosure would cause substantial injury to the public interest. If the applicant so requests, the custodian shall apply to the district court for an order permitting him or her to restrict disclosure. The application shall be subject to the procedures and burden of proof provided for in subsection (6) of this section. All persons entitled to claim the privilege with respect to the records in issue shall be given notice of the proceedings and shall have the right to appear and be heard. In determining whether disclosure of the records would cause substantial injury to the public interest, the court shall weigh, based on the circumstances presented in the particular case, the public interest in honest and frank discussion within government and the beneficial effects of public scrutiny upon the quality of governmental decision-making and public confidence therein. C.R.S. § 24-72-204(3)(a)(XIII).
In addition, pursuant to the definition of “Public Records” included in C.R.S. § 24-72-204(6), “Public Records” “…does not include…[w]ork product prepared for elected officials. However, elected officials may release, or authorize the release of, all or any part of work product prepared for them.” C.R.S. § 24-72-204(6)(b)(2).
On June 6th Ted Bendelow in violation of CORA denied Exposed copies of employment contracts for the umpteenth time and the board knew of it as we copied them on it so your new board juxtaposition denied two new CORA for innocuous records including refusing to waive the fee for the ledgers so I guess Troy isn’t as truthful as he claimed to be.
As Troy said to me on a recorded call early on, “I don’t want to ruin people lives”, but it was ok for them to ruin mine right? Troy just a simple question did you run a background check on me too? You didn’t have to I would have given you my records up front I have nothing to hide.
Troy you set the tone of what was to come and that was before the election. That’s not all he said but I am not afraid or ashamed of what we talked about so Troy bring it on as we say in Boston.
Before the election you did say things would be different and yet the board for a third time in 6 weeks just let Teddy and Peterson call the shots and you heard it here first. We asked for a waiver in the emails and now the “new” board if 1.5 for 5 for CORA. We did get some BS documents on the new Ford Explorer, whoopie.
Now we can establish the board is the same circus with different entertainers at least so far.
Where’s the transparency you all promised?
Guess after the election “transparency” has a different meaning.
Still wonder why I am pissed off cause this is not what voters voted for and they set the tone in the second meeting right out the gate and I support the board but not at the expense of hiding information from the public which was the crux of what they all touted and to Sherry I am disappointed to see you sit there and let this go down like this I had hoped for better from you.
This establishes you lied to me for support and now the the community as I recorded both meet and greets and now Ted and Lisa proved who runs the show in only 6 weeks.
What are you hiding that is so criminal that we need the FBI to do a real investigation or in the alternative have the Attorney General come in and clean house.
Only 6 weeks and the transparency is not here. Why didn’t the board tell Bendelow and Peterson to turn over the unredacted documents?