Link to the Frank Quatrone “settlement”:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17rySyJfT9RWPBbKc91c_XhsuVDZ6gq6B/view?usp=sharing
Absent from the settlement is any legal analysis of a law that went into effect on June 8, 2007 limiting superintendent payouts. Absent is any legal analysis of anything.
Sharon Salvacion, Nancy Cardone, and Lodi Police Chief Donald Scorzetti were prohibited from voting on this settlement based on the state’s conflict of interest laws. All voted “Yes” anyway. A bogus “doctrine of necessity” was used. Sharon Salvacion, Nancy Cardone, and Lodi Police Chief Donald Scorzetti all voted “Yes” on the bogus doctrine of necessity.
Matthew Giacobbe advised that he wanted the case to go
before a judge. The case was “settled”
right before it was scheduled to go before a judge.
Page 1 of the Settlement states "WHEREAS, the Board filed an Answer denying the merits of Quatrone's claim".
Matthew Giacobbe billed the Lodi taxpayers when his firm filed an Answer denying the merits of Quatrone's claim. That answer should be made public. Did Giacobbe's Answer contradict the "settlement" in any way? How are these actions not being investigated?
Marc Schrieks really screwed the Lodi taxpayers before his sudden resignation. Was it timed that way? Was his job finished after he delivered for Frank Quatrone?
