These are the two statements I made during the 2 Feb, 2023 City Council Meeting on ‘censure’. I wrote them like this to conform to our current ‘four minutes at a time’ format. [Edit: below is the video ‘evidence’ from 8 Dec, 2022, on which the employee complaint was based. There is no audio. I did not receive a copy of this video until 18 April, 2023, two months after the vote was taken.]
#1
Many years ago, my dear wife was driving through the University of Washington with two very young, unhappy children and cut off a man in his very large truck. He expressed his unhappiness through the window and let’s just say that she reactedwithout as much contrition as he thought appropriate.
So, he followed her home, across the bridge, down I-5, into Burien, all the way to our house and pulled up behind her. In the dark. He got out and knocked on the window, apparently wanting to make her aware of the severity of her offense in almost damaging his very nice new truck.
I came out of the house and had a different reaction. I see my terrified wife in a small car, two screaming black children in the back seat, with a strange white guy in a dual axle truck, and had exactly zero empathy for his feelings about whatever. When you overreact so spectacularly in any situation, you have crossed a line.
The first time the event under discussion was explained to me was on a Zoom call with the Investigator–a month after the event occurred.
I expressed empathy and concern for the employee in question. Afterwards I read the DM Personnel Manual which discusses several options. And at that moment about 90% of my empathy went out the window, when I realised that whatever the problem was, in response, someone at City Hall had picked up the phone and made a choice. But instead of calling me, they chose to call two attorneys.
The remaining 10% of my empathy evaporated during executive session last month, when no one asked some very basic academic questions. Is there evidence? There is not. Is the investigators report accurate? It is not.
Given the chronic lack of transparency I hear about from the public, literally every week, the question I had hoped that somebody would have asked is not “Do you believe the employee”. Of course I would.
I do not believe the report, because it is inaccurate. Not a little. A lot. And in my, fact-based world, regardless of the emotions in play, one should question second hand reports. One should be expected to provide some evidence that the reporter at least got the quotes right.
I would love to have that video recording. I would love to see the communication between the employee and the City. I would love to have any primary sources. They exist and I’ve asked for all of them.
Beyond that, this entire show is also such a spectacular overreaction that it cannot be tolerated. It isn’t like the incident with that truck. It’s far worse. At least that guy had the excuse of operating on raw adrenaline. This is government. Something that could have been de-escalated at several points over the last two months.
After three years of this similar rubbish, I expected this night would come. Or rather, something like it. Not because of anything I’ve done or would ever do. But rather because of what I represent. Some people will do almost anything to prevent change. And that should Freak. You. Out. It brings to the surface something so ugly, but normative we stopped even noticing it. We simply try to navigate it as best we can. It’s the reason I ran for office.
#2
It’s a funny thing. If you push back against something like this, you’re insensitive. As I said, I would love to have any transparency on this.
It’s been that way for three years. On everything. Everything. We received a copy of the March negotiating agreement on that hotel. Last Monday. After it was cancelled. That’s is exactly the way the city handles everything. Including this. No better, no worse.
Still, I know why people do not apply the same skepticism to this as something like a hotel. We have a tough time accepting that anyone in our nice little town, would be so shameless. To take advantage of such a personal issue solely for political gain takes some stones.
If you watched the last meeting, we’re talking about at least a hundred million dollars. Just at the Marina. With all that on the line, and knowing how much people want to do the right thing? Why wouldn’t someone try to take advantage?
In the absence of any evidence, I would ask you look at how I’ve conducted myself on the dais, how my colleagues conduct themselves, and how I respond to chronic harassment, intimidation, fibbing no one should have to tolerate. I get letters expressing regret at all the bullying, but another question people don’t ask is, “Why is it tolerated?” I ran for office to help change that.
Electeds are not employees. Ironically, it was set up that way because, in a properly functioning government we’re supposed to be above the administration. So, we have no HR rights. If we did, my HR complaint with the City would be. This. Long. As insensitive as it may sound, the wrong people are on trial here. That’s what the facts of the past 3.5 years say.
And since I’m not an employee, I condemn anyone voting for this right back and particularly the sponsor, who has demonstrated the chronic lack of good judgment necessary to be Mayor. I’m going to frame a copy of this fish wrapping and display it as a badge of honor.
Going back to sensitivity. Unlike my colleagues, I’ve known all along exactly how the entire town feels about all kinds of things, like that hotel. I knocked on 6,000+ doors when I ran for office. I know how people feel and those people know how I conduct myself one on one.
On the contrary, we owe the public an apology for a complete lack of sensitivity. They have caused an unconscionable amount of unnecessary upset with our chronic lack of transparency and certainty; which I’m sure developers also appreciate. Not. We change direction, then patronise and scold the community for having the nerve to object; while at the same time thanking them for all their great public input!
When people raise the issue of transparency? That’s just a polite way of saying, “I’m not sure I can trust you.” We need to fix that and the most sensitive thing I think I can continue to do is to continue to knock on doors and maintain a consistent message.
But in spite of all this junk, it continues to be, truly, my honour to serve. Not because of what we are tonight. But because of what I know Des Moines can be. That’s the only reason to do this.
Comments