If lack of disclosure/working on Sparks vs Joachim while employed with the City of Eureka was not part of the reason for Curtis Davis' termination; all he had to do is send me a brief written response

 

On June 9, I was the first to report that Curtis Davis was no longer employed by the City of Eureka as a Deputy City Attorney and was terminated. I got a brief response from Eureka City Manager Miles Slattery confirming June 6, 2025 was Mr. Davis' last day with the City of Eureka.

On July 10, I did a very detailed post which included some information from a PRA request I made to the City of Eureka. 

On July 21, the City of Eureka sent me another response to my PRA. There are some documents I took a look at and others have accessibility issues that I don't have time to deal with at this very busy time with other news and court cases. The documents are either subpoenas, notices and depositions in the Sparks vs Joachim case.

The two documents I could open are dated after Davis was terminated by the City of Eureka.

In my July 10 post, I explained in detail about lack of a written response from Mr. Davis which was requested more than once. With Mr. Davis choosing not to respond; the question still remains that was the headline of my July 10 post.

If lack of disclosure/working on Sparks vs Joachim while employed with the City of Eureka was not part of the reason for Curtis Davis' termination; all he had to do is send me a brief written response.

I have other information that I am unable to publish at this time. 

Previous posts:

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2025/07/was-lack-of-disclosure-andor-working-on.html?m=1

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2025/06/curt-davis-is-no-longer-deputy-attorney.html?m=1