1st Supe District Watch: Jimmy Camp Sues Janet Nguyen For Non-Payment
Posted by: Jubal | 05/07/2008 12:01 PM
The long, strange political saga of Janet Nguyen has taken another curious turn.She is being sued in small claims court by the man who quarterbacked her recount effort in the wake of the Feb. 2007 special election: veteran GOP operative Jimmy Camp.
The reason: Janet's refusal to pay Jimmy the final $2,500 of the $10,000 win bonus he was promised if she won the recount.
Jimmy has been working in OC and California GOP politics for close to twenty years. he has worked with a laundry-list of candidates, elected officials and movers-and-shakers. He is roundly liked, admired and respected.
Why stiff him?
Leaving aside the wrongness of refusing to pay someone what you owe them...but forcing Jimmy Camp to go to court to in order to get paid? Why confirm the persistent criticism that Janet isn't ready for prime time with this display of political pettiness annd immaturity?
Obviously, Janet can bank on this being the subject of hit pieces. But it also takes a toll on her image annd credibility among other elected officials, donors, activists, etc -- the OC political class. As OC GOPers have wearied of the Van-Janet war of attrition, my sense is sympathy has been shifting to Janet. As she acquired a better feel for her office and largely stopped making mistakes that highlighted her inexperience -- couple with a political party's natural aversion to destructive intra-party fights -- the narrative in the political class has shifted (fairly or unfairly) away from Janet's flaws and acquired a negative view of Assemblyman Van Tran as a vindictive ethnic machine boss.
Jimmy Camp's lawsuit shifts it right back on Janet and how she's acquired a remarkable number of enemies in a short political career.
Jimmy Camp's situation is illustrative. Camp was hired to quarterback Janet's recount effort following the special election -- the effort that wiped out Trung Nguyen's 7-vote victory and led to Janet being elected by a 3-vote margin. I'd say service of that nature merits gratitude and loyalty.
Jimmy agreed to run the recount effort for a low $2,500 on the condition of getting a $10,000 win bonus if Janet won the recount.
As we know, Team Janet pulled it off at the end of February, and $7,500 of Jimmy's win bonus was dribbled out to him over the next few months.
Following Janet's election, Jimmy Camp express to her his interest in joining her supervisor staff. It's pretty standard for victorious candidates to bring campaign staff with them into office, and if you are a young, inexperienced new Supervisor with only two years of service as an elected official, brining a savvy politico like Jimmy Camp on board would be a smart move. IF she had done so, Janet's first months in office likely would not have been so bumpy.
Word came back to Jimmy about Janet's response: Jimmy's appearance didn't fit in with the image she wanted her office to project.
Considering Janet hired her sister, her recount attorney and her political bag man onto her staff, concern that Jimmy's tattoos project the wrong image suggests a lack of perspective.
So why stiff Jimmy Camp for the final $2,500 payment? Jimmy had a conversation with a reporter which it came out that Jimmy's recount fee was paid by Phil Greer, and that led to Mike Schroeder finding out (and which was public information that was subsequently included in Janet's campaign report).
And that led to Jimmy waiting month after month after month for his final payment -- until now, more than a year later, Jimmy has to go to court to get his money.
This episode spotlights Janet's talent for self-inflicted wounds and unnecessarily making people. It's practically impossible to rise in elected office without alienating some people -- but to make an enemy of the guy who ran the recount effort that put you in office because you're too irritated at him to pay your bill?
Janet's decision to stiff Jimmy Camp for $2,500 is bringing a lawsuit, bad publicity, lowered estimation in the eyes of the political class, and provides extra material for more hit pieces.
I think it would have been cheaper to pay the $2,500.
Janet's trying to get re-elected; the last thing she needs is another court case that re-opens the whole recount can-of-worms. The question is whether Janet draws this out, or pays her bill and puts this episode in the rear view mirror.
UPDATE (5/8/08): Predictably, Art Pedroza went home, talked to his controller in the Janet Nguyen camp and dutifully regurgitated the script, along with a compost heap of Pedroza nastiness. The guy is unhinged.
Art is the Squealer for Janet Nguyen (minus the charisma, intellect and eloquence, but with all the malevolence). Anyone who has read George Orwell's "Animal Farm" will know what I mean.
Although I don't know Jimmy, on the few occasions that I've met him he always struck me as the kind of straight shooter that I want on my team. It's one thing to not hire; it's altogether another thing to stiff someone out of a paycheck they've EARNED. If this is true, SHAME ON JANET.
What a surprise that someone that has worked with Janet is having issues with her. Janet has a pattern of using people and then turning on him or her once they are not useful any longer.
Janet's old habbit is coming out again!
Blame it($2,500 stiffing) on her immaturity?(Yes,Janet is only 30 years old)
Or should we label it as breaking the promise/contract law by OC Supervisor?
Too funny. I told Jimmy to watch out for her.
You probably should have redacted Jimmy's address on the paperwork.
...and the Reublican Party of Orange County endorsed her???
On top of that, I'm hearing horror stories about Janet Nguyen's thuggery and deceit in obtaining the endorsement to begin with...what was with all those changing around of alternate members at the last minute? Even the DPOC doesn't do that...
I'm also hearing something about some illegal payments that were funneled through her attorney's office that's about to come to light as well. ...All of this is sounding way too much like a chapter right out of the Carona scandal...
Just curious...Why exactly did Scott Baugh push so hard to endorse a flawed incumbent like Janet to begin with? Didn't the Party learn anything from the Carona mess? Why didn't the Party stay out of the race as advised by those who live in the district and know first hand about Janet? It sounds to me like a withdrawl of endrosement is appropriate for the County GOP...too bad the sheep won't stand up to the wolves...
*sighs*
Eventually the OCGOP will learn (unfortunately through the hard way) what Van and his Central OC team have known (and spoken out about) for a long time: Janet can't be trusted.
When that happens I just hope the "political class" isn't too proud of themselves not to apologize to Van for the disrespect they've shown him lately.
I'm sorry Jimmy Camp had to find out this way. Just like The Captain, I also warned him about her. I give him credit for giving her the initial benefit of the doubt. I'm sure he'll never do that again.
Just Curious, I agree. Scott Baugh needs to be replaced from our OC GOP post. Scott has been making too many WRONG decisions for our party.
Hey Jubal,
Maybe you should call Dave Gillard or Adam P. to get the straight story on this. A little one sided story huh.
"...the narrative in the political class has shifted (fairly or unfairly) away from Janet's flaws and acquired a negative view of Assemblyman Van Tran as a vindictive ethnic machine boss..."
It seems unfair to cast Van as a "vindictive." Especially after all of his efforts for Daucher in the Senate race.
It's also unfair to cast Van as only concerned about one ethnicity. He worked for Bob Dornan and Ed Royce (when he was a state senator) and came into politics through the Young Americans for Freedom (YAF.) Also, Daucher and John McCain are not Vietnamese, and he has helped them quite a bit.
Lastly, I wish more of our GOP legislative members would build machines so we can take out Feinstein, Boxer, Solario, Correa, and Sanchez and retake our Congressional Majority.
Janet is worthless in this effort.
What did Jubal report that is opinion? Seems like nothing but the facts.
Dave or Adam can spin it, but the truth is the truth.
What gives is right. Why didn't someone call Janet's consultants/handlers to look into this before putting up this post?
I don't think this would make much of a hit piece. Voters in the first district don't know who the heck Jimmy is and could care less if he was paid or not.
I do agree that he does not portray a professional image. Maybe he can use the $7,500 to laser off some of those tattoos.
Is there a written contract stipulating that he is due another $2,500? Is there written proof that he formally requested the payment?
This "scandal" doesn't pass the stink test.
Why didn't someone call Janet's consultants/handlers to look into this before putting up this post?
Excuse while I die laughing.
This complaint comes from the same guy who never calls the targets of his character assassination attempts before hand to get their side of the story. What a hypocrite.
Good old, Art. It's good to have him around so the rest of us can appreciate the fact that we're sane.
What gives:
I offered Team Janet the opportunity to provide a response shortly before I posted, and the offer still stands.
As for Art -- I think the previous commenter put it well.
Pedroza says, "What gives is right. Why didn't someone call Janet's consultants/handlers to look into this before putting up this post?" DUH! WHY? EVERYBODY WHO IS SOMEBODY IN POLITICS AROUND HERE KNOWS JIMMY'S A STRAIGHT SHOOTER AND JANET AND HER CREW ARE NOT.
"I don't think this would make much of a hit piece. Voters in the first district don't know who the heck Jimmy is and could care less if he was paid or not." FIRST, NO ONE REALLY CARES WHAT YOU THINK, PEDROZA. HOWEVER, THE VOTERS WILL CARE TO KNOW AND SHOULD KNOW THAT JANET NGUYEN DOESN'T KEEP HER WORD OR PAY HER BILLS. SHE CAN'T BE TRUSTED TO GOVERN.
"I do agree that he does not portray a professional image. Maybe he can use the $7,500 to laser off some of those tattoos." WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT; PORTRAYING A PROFESSIONAL IMAGE OR BEING PROFESSIONAL? JIMMY CAMP IS A SOUGHT AFTER, RESPECTED CAMPAIGNER UP AND DONE THE STATE - SOMETHING YOU'LL NEVER BE. MAYBE YOU SHOULD HIT THE GYM AND GET SOME MEDS BEFORE YOU OPINE ON SOMEONE ELSE'S IMAGE...
"Is there a written contract stipulating that he is due another $2,500? Is there written proof that he formally requested the payment?" IT IS COMMON IN THIS BUSINESS TO WORK ON A HANDSHAKE AND YOUR WORD WHEN YOU'RE WORKING WITH OTHER RESPECTED CAMPAIGNERS ON BEHALF OF A CANDIDATE. IT'S COMMON KNOWLEDGE JANET OWES JIMMY THIS MONEY. HOW SHAMEFUL (AND STUPID) OF HER TO LET IT COME TO A LAWSUIT. IT'S BECAUSE OF JIMMY'S EFFORTS SHE'S A SUPERVISOR TO BEGIN WITH - DUH!
"This "scandal" doesn't pass the stink test." BECAUSE THE "ALMIGHTY" PEDROZA SAYS SO? THIS ISN'T ORANGE JUICE AND WE AREN'T YOUR VERY LITTLE FAN CLUB VIGOROUSLY POSTING ANNONYMOUSLY ALONG SIDE YOU TO PROP UP YOUR EGO AND WACKED OPINIONS. THIS IS A CREDIBLE LAWSUIT AND JIMMY CAMP IS ENTITLED TO HIS HARD-EARNED MONEY.
I agree with "Just Curious," the Party should seriously consider withdrawing the endorsement of Janet Nguyen.
This would be an excellent opportunity to for everyone reading this blog to ensure the best Republican candidate gets elected in the 1st Superviors District. Send your contribution in support of DINA NGUYEN today to:
DINA NGUYEN for Supervisor
9191 Bolsa Avenue Suite 110
Westminster, CA 92683
ph: 714-657-2425
info@dinaforsupervisor.com
You can also call or make phone calls for Dina as well!
I meant to say, "WALK or make phone calls for Dina as well."
It sure does sound like Art has already been on the phone with Mistress Janet, who instructed her slave on his talking points.
And you know, one of these days it would be nice if Art bothered to apply to himself the same standards he applies to everyone else.
Art. Standards. In the same sentence? What am I thinking?!?!?
Art excuse me while I laugh my ass off at your comment. WHen have you EVER called to confirm or get the other sides story BEFORE posting something. LMAO!
I can't wait to See Jimmy Camp lose this one.
A. No signed Contract
B. He was hired by Gillard for 10,000 total 2,500 up front and a 7,500 win bonus.
C. Mike S. told him to file this. So convient the same week Absentee's get mailed.
He Jimmy you pay your taxes that you owe the state in the tune of 18,000 dollars. Have fun losing
Nice, OC Insider.
If it wasn't for Jimmy Camp, Janet would be voting on zoning variances and shaking down contributors for her Garden Grove Council re-election.
But with Janet, those two things are interchangeable, aren't they?
What an ingrate.
LOL OC Insider - I do not know whether he had a contract or not but it is in very bad taste to not pay your vendors and not be a person of honor and honor your word and agreements with people. This will make all vendors wary of dealing with that campaign.
Flowerezz LOL same typical BS from you..... The contract was for 10grand total.
Good point. Nice to see OC Insider thinks it is OK to rip someone off as long as there's no written agreement.
Anytime Janet makes a promise, I guess we'll have to get it in writing, eh, OC Insider?
That's "Good point, Flowerszzz."
The contract was for 10grand total.
Wait a sec, OC Insider. A few minutes ago, you said there was no signed contract. And now you're claiming there was a contract.
You MUST be a Janet staffer -- can't even keep your lies straight.
I wish I could say I'm troubled to hear Janet's staffers attacking Jimmy. The sad part is we all expected it.
Good lord, how did this girl pull the wool over so many people's eyes?
Oh yeah, I forgot, she had help from the usual suspects.
OC Insider - did he have a contract or not? according to the story the fee was $2500 plus A WIN BONUS OF $10k. You contradict yourself and then tell me I am talking BS? very funny for sure.
You know, I was so sick of both sides that I didn't really care who won this election.
But after seeing the way Janet treated a stand-up guy like Jimmy, especially since he did more than anyone to make sure she won that recount -- is infuriating.
Now I hope Dina forces Janet into a run-off and then takes her out in November.
I see the attack dogs have been loosed. Keep it up and you'll be exiled to the pound.
Me thinks if there was a contract, Matt would have posted it. No contract. No dice.
Me thinks if there was a contract, Matt would have posted it.
There was a verbal agreement.
No contract. No dice.
That's a reprehensible attitude.
I've done campaign work on verbal agreements, and have never been stiffed. On the few times I've ever been stiffed on consulting work, I had a written agreement.
Like an earlier commenter said, people often do campaign work on a handshake or based on an exchange of e-mails, without a signed agreement.
This is a case where the right thing and the smart thing are the same thing. Janet should pay Jimmy right away and put this behind her.
I think this settles the question of whether buying a blogad on Red County buys you positive coverage!
Jubal-
You are lucky if you have never been stiffed without a contract. I don't lift a finger until I have a signed contract and a check. Never. Thinking back, I once helped a family member run for local office and I had a signed contract.
I have the same attitude as 8:00 anon. and I think your tolerance for what you consider reprehensable is quite low. Written contracts are standard in campaigns....all aspects of campaigns. Working with out one puts you in the situation that Jimmy finds himself in.
Perhaps there is another reason why she doesn't just pay him off, as you suggest? Perhaps she doesn't want to publically embarrass Jimmy?
You and the rest of the blog-sphere assume she is in the wrong-- This is something you have ZERO firsthand knowledge of. Let the two of them go to court and let a judge decide.
Jubal asks ......Why stiff him?........
Look I have known Camp for years and he secertly loves to be stiffed??
You are lucky if you have never been stiffed without a contract.
It's been on occasions where the consultants have been people I know and trust, even if I don't know the candidate, and so the possibility I would be stiffed doesn't cross my mind.
Lack of a written contract may make it legally permissible to stiff someone, but it doesn't make it right.
As for publicly embarrassing Jimmy: he already hung out his life, dirty and clean laundry both, for the readers of the OC Register last year in two Frank Mickadeit columns.
You and the rest of the blog-sphere assume she is in the wrong-- This is something you have ZERO firsthand knowledge of.
I don't just assume Janet is wrong. But I have no reason to believe Jimmy is lying. And how much first hand knowledge do you have?
Jubal-
You assume that Janet agreed to Jimmy's figure, didn't get it in writing and then decided out of spite to stiff him.
Do you conceed that point that it is possible that she never agreed to the increased amount, and paid him what she believes was the agreed upon figure?
First hand? not much. I did hear a rumor over a year ago that she was instructed not to pay him directly any longer. A government agency of some sort is owed money.
Do you conceed that point that it is possible that she never agreed to the increased amount, and paid him what she believes was the agreed upon figure?
Of course it is possible, as much as anything is possible. But I think it's highly unlikely. I'm sure Jimmy knew exactly how much he was promised, which is why he agreed to run the recount drill for a low figure.
Let me put it this way: if I were Janet and Jimmy spent more than a week running a recount effort in which every single ballot was vitally important in terms of being counted or tossed, and then spent several weeks sorting and organizing disputed ballots so Team Janet's legal team could save Janet's sliver of a lead in court, and stayed on call as Team Janet's witness -- all for the bargain price of $2,500 -- I would, at the end of the day, realize that I wouldn't be a Supervisor if it weren't for his hard work and professionalism. And if there were a disagreement or misunderstanding over whether the win bonus was $10,000 or $7,500, I would gratefully resolve it in Jimmy's favor.
Jubal-
Since neither you nor I were in Gilliard's office or Jimmy's apartment, we don't know what amount was agreed upon. I think Jimmy is going to have a tough time without the agreement in writing or even an email. Certainly considering time was of the essence, a simple email summarizing the terms of the agreement would be sufficent. And perhaps Jimmy has that. I don't know.
As for his critical role in the recount. Of course his help was valuable. But, one could argue, when you win by three votes, the volunteer walker or phone banker could be just as responsible for the victory as a paid political operative. I guess hindsight is 20-20.
As for his critical role in the recount. Of course his help was valuable. But, one could argue, when you win by three votes, the volunteer walker or phone banker could be just as responsible for the victory as a paid political operative. I guess hindsight is 20-20.
Not to discount a very well run campaign, but those efforts got Janet to a 7-vote loss. It was during the recount -- and the efforts of Jimmy's recount team -- that was turned into a 3-vote win.
Like I said earlier, given the results Jimmy and his team delivered, I wouldn't quibble over $2,500.
Jimmy said so I believe it. Anyone who knows him would agree. I don't know Janet Nguyen personally so I can't comment on that side.
And I have a small reason to be a bit bitter about the whole thing.
Jubal-
What if he claimed $20K win bonus? Should she pay that amount? Or is it to low, insignificant amount that boils your blood?
Joe-
I do know both. I think it is possible that there was a misunderstanding considering everyone's state of mind. And I do not think Jimmy is a liar.
MB
Mark:
What if he claimed $50K ? Or $100K? Come on. You're too smart to resort to a reductio ad absurdum argument. Jimmy is making no such claim, so that line of reasoning is unhelpful.
It's the principle. It's the smug anonymous comments emanating from Janeteers that it's OK to stiff Jimmy because there's nothing in writing -- with the added bonus of attacks on Jimmy's character.
Don't people see the pattern. Everyone that worked with or for during her short career intensely hates her. Her enemies are people that were once her friends.
As Jubal mentioned, how does someone who's only been in elected office for barley four years have so many enemies? Has anyone ever seen anything like it in OC politics? Would Janet's supporters have us believe EVERYONE is out to get Janet, and that EVERY critic just has an axe to grind?
Wake up! She's a walking ethical train wreck.
Jubal is 100% correct...... we are talking about the principle here!
Let it be a $1 or $100k promise....Janet needs to keep her end of the bargain by paying Jimmy Camp.
Janet office's lame excuses are absolutely absurd.
A OC Republican Supervisor stiffing $2500 from her diligent political consultant is .......... sad,embarrassing and bad.
Jubal-
I didn't take Latin at Georgetown, so I am not sure what sort of arguement I am resorting to. But I do think it is an important point. If she didn't agree to the amount he claimed, why should she pay it? Because the amount is so small, it is worth paying it so he will go away? Come on, you are too smart to assert that.
I guess you and I will have to disagree on this matter like gentlemen. I am entirely too busy to continue this dialogue. I have a business to run, as do you.
For what it is worth, it has been my personal experience that Janet pays her bills and errors on the side of people and vendors that have helped her. Obviously, Jimmy has a different experience.
OC GOP needs to retract it's wasted endorsement for UNETHICAL JANET!
Mark, where have you been for last 2 years?
Many bloggers have been complaining about Janet's selfish character for some time now and Jimmy's bad experience only bolsters their long claim.
Because the amount is so small, it is worth paying it so he will go away?
That makes it sound like Jimmy's shaking her down, and I think we all know he wouldn't do that.
Again, if I were in Janet's shoes, and if this is indeed simply an honest disagreement over the amount Jimmy's agreed to work for, I would gladly agree to resolve it in his favor -- out of appreciation for what he did, as well as to avoid needlessly turning a friend into an enemy.
Matt/Jubal,
If I am a squealer for Janet, does that make you a squealer for the Trannies?
Mark, with all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. I think you're a good guy and all but you have ZERO idea who you're dealing with (Janet Nguyen) if you think this was just a "simple misunderstanding".
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Wait until the rest comes out. Wait until the OCGOP finds out who paid for Woocher. Wait until the OCGOP finds out HOW Janet paid for her recount team.
Janet is lucky that Jimmy hasn't come out and admitted everything. He knows that she knows, that he knows the truth, and I think he's trying to get her to fix her f-up up without having to reveal the whole truth. By sending her attack lackeys after his character she is only pushing him into a corner and he will have no other recourse but to go public with the VERY harmful information he has.
Jimmy, I told you not to get involved with this girl. Now I'm telling you to throw her under the bus. You should have listened to me then. Please listen to me now.
Don't bring me down to your level, Art. I'm not a Squealer, period.
Art, comparing yourself to Matt is laughable. Not even your old Liberal OC friends respect you anymore.
You should move to Miami and try your luck playing victim with the latinos on the other side of the country.
As someone not in OC and therefore an outsider, I have to say you all sound like third graders on the playground. Support whom you want and let it be. Point out facts, but the references to Trannies and Jannies really shows how ridiculous this has become.
Maybe the two sides should set-up a game of dodge ball and the winner gets bragging rights. Just make sure you all play fair or you might get sent to the principal.
I agree, Jubal's standards are pretty low. He has been brown-nosing Me-Me Walters and others, acting like he's on permanent PMS. I don't trust a lot of them. I hope he has a written agreement with proven backstabbers. A lot of times he does seem like a reasonable guy, but, frankly, I think he would do himself a huge favor if he came out of the closet already.
What????? Matt is defending a campaign staffer who was screwed by a candidate. In your mind, that translates to his being gay? I did this job for a long time and never had a contract. I was only stiffed once in several years. Contracts are not the norm-especially not when you have a good relationship with the consultant who hired you. To attack Matt's character/sexuality/whatever because he frowns on a candidate failing to pay her debts to one of the hardest workers in the business is absolutely absurd.
"....Jubal's standards are pretty low..." Give me a break!
Jubal is just trying to uphold the basic principle of being FAIR!
I think Matt is doing a excellent job in defining "moral ground" for some "lost" polticians.
Are You Insane?:
"Jubal's Fried" aka "Red Socks" aka "JIFOCAU" is, judging by his/her comments, an angry Harry Sidhu supporter taking out his or her frustrations out on me.
I appreciate you comment of support.
The OC Register's blog says, "Jimmy Camp gets his money."
Being “promised his money” and “gets his money” are as different as night and day, especially when Janet Nguyen and her team are involved. This story is not over until we can see a cashiers check in Jimmy Camp’s hand - paid legally by Janet Nguyen this time.