Its Personal

Site Search:

Its Personal

Disclaimer: All the statements made in this article are the writer's opinion, based on what has been seen and heard. Certain opinions, such as stealing, might be more accurately described in other legal terms, such as embezzlement, but since the writer is not an attorney, the specific correct legal term might not be used.

There was an interesting letter to the editor in the Simi Valley Acorn:

Sandberg is the 'outsider' in race
Why would Ralph LaMontagne engage in fearmongering? Why would he write such a deceptive letter? Some might think that he did it because he thought that he was right, but based on what I know of him, it seems far more likely that it is personal as he has been on the wrong side of family issues recently. That makes what he is doing dishonest and unethical in my opinion. He wrote the letter in a manner which seems to be intended to deceive people, but then again what do you expect from a lawyer?

There are multiple aspects as to why it is so interesting, but the first is that it shows that some people, such as Ralph LaMontagne, or as his Mother liked to call him "Monty", that he is completely ignorant as to the City of Simi Valley's government or that he is willing to be completely dishonest in order to attack me. Ralph LaMontagne has shown me that he likes to make false assumptions and then think it is reality and his wife does the same thing. In case you have not guessed, I unfortunately know him as he is my brother-in-law and in my opinion he is a dishonest and unethical person, as well as his wife, my sister, Judy LaMontagne, but more on that later (what can you say about people who help a person stealing another's pension money with no legal basis?). Due to their abusive behavior, including absurd email messages, I have been forced to tell both of them to not communicate with me at all, yet they continued to contact me after I told them not to. In my opinion they both have some serious mental issues.

His letter is deceptive since it seems he is trying to hide the fact that he knows me, or at least he thinks he does. He is so selfish and self-centered I don't think he actually knows anyone as he really does not seem to care about others. As a side note, what is quite funny about him is that he made false claims about me, to me, as if he knew more about me than I do. I don't think he has a clue of how stupid that makes him look to me or anyone who actually knows me.

One thing I find interesting is that I don't see any complaint from Ralph LaMontagne that Bob Huber did not list his full-time job on the ballot, which is a personal injury attorney, who has sued the City for his clients 10 times, most of the time getting nothing. Is that lawyers sticking together? Could it be that Huber wanted to be Mayor in order to make changes so that lawyers can get money from the City? Since he has been Mayor, the City has paid when there is no requirement that they do so. I wonder if there is something that Ralph LaMontagne will get out of this personally as he is a lawyer who deals with insurance issues.

The first major mistake that Ralph LaMontagne makes is with his claim that the Mayor is the chief executive. It is actually the City Manager, who is the City's chief administrative officer, who actually runs the city, not the Mayor. The Mayor runs the Council meetings and cuts ribbons, which does not take much training and I have read Robert's Rules of Order and know how to use scissors. Due to this perhaps it would be best if Ralph LaMontagne would refrain from voting as he does not seem to be qualified (somewhat of a joke for the humor impaired).

The second major issue is that Ralph LaMontagne does not realize that in order to have a statement made in the sample ballot that candidates have to pay for it, around $900. If Ralph LaMontagne was paying attention to reality, he would notice that I am not accepting campaign donations and not spending money, so that means it is impossible to have a campaign statement in the sample ballot, but that kind of logic seems to escape him.

The third major issue is that Ralph LaMontagne does not understand how the City government operates. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for anyone on the Council, including the Mayor, to bring the orderly handling of the city's business to a screeching halt. The Mayor can't stop the City Manager from running the City. He also shows that he does not understand that the Mayor is actually on the Council, so it makes absolutely no sense to claim that I have no intention to cooperate with the Council. Facts also show this to be false since I have spoken before the Council, as well as talking individually to Council members. His claim that there would be warfare is just delusional. This is just another example of his making false assumptions and then thinking that it is reality, which indicates to me that he has some serious mental issues.

The fourth issue is that it seems clear that he sees only what he wants to see. My issues with the City Council is neither gratuitous nor petty. He does not seem to understand that there are issues which need to get fixed and the only way to fix those issues is to mention those issues and to understand the issues.

It seems that trying to associate Simi Valley with Washington, as well as many of his other complaints, to just be grasping at straws in order to attack me.

This makes his claim that there is only one person running for Mayor having the qualifications and temperament to handle the job completely bogus. The reality is that there is only one person running who is not out for their own personal interest, nor for special interests, which is Ken Sandberg.

Who are Ralph and Judy LaMontagne?
With the argument shown to be rather bizarre and absurd, let's take a closer look at who Ralph LaMontagne actually is. Recently it has been shown that Ralph LaMontagne, as well as his wife, Judy LaMontagne, were on the wrong side of a legal matter in which they were helping the person who was stealing Judy's mother's pension. I suspect his vendetta against me is in response to showing that he is wrong numerous times in matters not related to this election.

Here is a a nice article regarding Ralph LaMontagne in which his actions are called "vile" and "mean", just like with his letter to the editor.

Attorney for Woman Widowed at Municipal Air Show Calls Demand for Litigation Costs 'Mean', 'Vile'
So it seems such actions are just in keeping with what Ralph LaMontagne likes to do. Notice the article states that "This guy loves to work in the dark". This is the same thing that he is trying to do here by not disclosing the truth that he actually knows me. I suspect he did not want to admit the truth since then his letter might not have been printed. I feel that Judy LaMontagne is responsible for the death of my beloved cat Miko (she claimed that she forgot to come over and take care of him when I was on vacation and one of her responses was "I'm sorry if I forgot to go over there but you seem to forget all the many many other times I went over sometimes twice a day.", for some very strange reason she seems to think that her going over other times excuses her from being responsible for Miko's death by not taking care of him as she said that she would) and some of her statements show how cold and self-centered she is, as well as an absurd attempt to justify her actions.

Normally I would keep such family matters private, but since Ralph LaMontagne has taken to publically attack me, I have little choice in order to defend myself and explain why he is doing what he is.

The most recent issue is that Ralph and Judy LaMontagne helped the woman who was taking Judy and my mother's pension money with NO legal basis, thereby putting my Mother at risk, in many ways due to having limited funds.

It seems that Judy and Ralph are quite gullible since this woman was somehow able to convince them that she should have the money instead of Judy's mother. This woman admitted that she owed the money and claimed that she would pay, yet she never did as my mother was running out of money. Perhaps they did not pay attention to all the money this woman has in investments, nor all of her income (around $7k plus an unknown amount from dividends vs. around $1.5k, including money that was owed each month), nor all of her absurd claims of expenses ($200/month for "books and treats and otc meds.", $40/month for "shaving cream, toothpaste, etc." (not sure of how you can spend that much money on that), $100/month for "Salon and Barber", etc.) as a means to try to claim why she should have the money instead of my Mother. Judy and Ralph blindly believed everything that this woman said and did not believe or care about documents or what Judy's mother said. This woman falsely claimed that my mother was overpaid over the years, but the bank records actually showed that my mother was underpaid. Just about everything this woman said seemed to be false, but the facts did not seem to matter to Judy and Ralph. The divorce court order, in black and white, did not change their opinion. Judy was asked for money to help her mother, but her response was that they were too far in debt to be able to help. From what I was told in the past Judy and Ralph's income is quite high, but it seems that they keep spending and end up in debt. In the past, they had refinanced their house multiple times in order to pay off credit card debt due to their excessive spending.

In some of the nasty/attack letters that Judy sent to her mother, she attacked me and made all sorts of false claims and innuendos, yet because she did not know the actual facts, it only made her look bad, very bad. I suspect she thought that she could fool her mother with her false statements, but she was wrong. Everything I did was at the direction and/or consent of my mother. Whereas Judy and Ralph LaMontagne were doing things to help the person who was taking the pension money. This cause a lot of stress and harm to my mother, including her ending up in an emergency room. None of us can figure out why Judy and Ralph were doing what they were. The best I can guess is that they have some serious mental issues.

The woman taking the money NEVER gave a defense as to why she was doing what she was and ended up paying most of the money that was owed. I suspect that the end result showing that Judy and Ralph were on the wrong side of the legal issue, especially since I am not an attorney and Ralph thinks that he knows EVERYTHING about EVERY legal aspect, harmed poor Ralph's ego. I have shown that Ralph has been wrong before, which I suspect is part of the reason that he seems to have a vedetta against me. I used to have to help them with repairs and other issues and since I have had to order them to stop all communication with me, this help has ceased. I suspect that this has also caused issues with them since they did not seem capable of dealing with many types of issues on their own.

Here are just a few of the things I know about Ralph and Judy LaMontagne which shows who they are:

Ralph LaMontagne helped a person violating a divorce court order by suddenly refusing to pay the spousal support and half of the pension (around $800/month). What makes this really bad is the person who was having the pension money stolen from her was Ralph's mother-in-law, who can not survive on just Social Security of $600/month. The person taking the money is my Father's current wife, their income is over $7k/month, excluding dividends which she said she gets, has a large amount in money in investments controlled by her son and has a daughter and son-in-law who are millionaires (legal settlement). In spite of Ralph and Judy helping this person to take the pension money, I helped my mother get her money. Why would a child not help her mother when her mother was legally right?

A funny story which shows Ralph does not pay proper attention to reality is that he was driving over the speed limit with his wife and his wife asked him if he realized that he was passing a marked police car. He didn't.

While driving home one night, after having been drinking, Ralph LaMontagne crashed his car into a parked truck. This is actually fortunate since it is clear that he was driving while impaired and could have easily hit and killed or injured someone and his accident prevented anyone else being at risk.

Ralph and Judy LaMontagne had a party in which a guest got drunk and left, only to be arrested for DUI. It seems that they did not care to ensure that their guests did not have too much to drink and then drive, endangering the public in Simi Valley.

Ralph LaMontagne endangered the public in my opinion when he was driving his red Lexus on the 118 with very little tread on the tires while it was raining. He ended up crashing, causing around $16k damage, but fortunately not hitting anyone else, and ended up with a ticket due to the tires.

Ralph LaMontagne told me that he driving on the 101 at a high rate of speed and passed a CHP officer on the side of the road. Instead of slowing down (I think he said that he sped up), he said he continued and got off the freeway and then back on the freeway, but in the other direction. He saw the officer going down the freeway with the lights on. He seemed to be proud of evading the police.

Ralph LaMontagne, with both of his children in the vehicle, turned in front of oncoming traffic and was hit by a vehicle coming the other way. He said he never saw the other vehicle coming and his vehicle was totaled.

He says that he needs expensive vehicles to take clients out in, yet when I did him a favor by taking his vehicle to the mechanic for service, it was a mess and shortly after starting out the low oil warning light came on. This shows me that he does not take care of his vehicles and is deceptive.

Judy sent several nasty letters to her Mother, including one on her Mother's birthday. For some odd reason, Judy blames her Mother as to why she decided to help the person stealing her pension money (this was never explained as to why).

On Thanksgiving, Judy LaMontagne called her Mother and was very nasty, including claiming that her Mother would be responsible if anything happened to her Father (divorced) if she demanded her pension money. Judy implies that she should live off her savings, which clearly Judy made a false assumption since my Mother did not have that much in savings and it just about ran out.

On one court date, Judy and Ralph LaMontagne came to support the women stealing Judy's Mother's pension and Judy did not even acknowledge her Mother at all. The Bailiff had to be called to tell Ralph, a lawyer, that he could not touch the documents.

Ralph LaMontagne claimed that my Father saw "imaginary" birds, yet I saw the birds, which were fake, but the reality was that my Father thought he saw the birds moving, which can be explained by watching the show "Brain Games", specifically the episode which deals with why people think that they see things moving.

Ralph showed he has a bad temper and is not able to accept answers that he does not like. I would often install updates when I was over during holidays as they did not properly maintain the computer. One time I was installing updates and Ralph wanted to use the computer. He asked how long it would take until I was done. I told him that I did not know. If anyone can tell in advance how long Microsoft Updates will take, please let me know. He asked the same question several times and the answer was always the same. He ended up blowing up and ordering me out of their house. He later left a message in a pathetic attempt to apologize, but what he basically said was that it was my fault because I made him upset. I should have told him "asked and answered counselor", perhaps he would have been able to undersand then, but I doubt it.

Index for Save Simi Valley

Written: 25-Oct-2014

Updated: 29-Oct-2014

If you want to submit your own article, please read the first article and send email

Send Mail

Anti Spam