This is the event referenced in my censure. Except that no one voting saw it. Because though the event occurred in December of 2022, I was only able to obtain it five months later. The rest of the charges were a fabrication. Employee complaints should be taken seriously for sure. But facts should more more. And this event should be taken particularly seriously because it represents the culture of the current government. We currently lack any semblance of evidence-based decision making. Council-Manager-Government, which has none of the guard rails of County, State and Federal governments, cannot work properly without it. In practical terms: this event is a microcosm of how all our decisions are currently being made. Fixing this process, making every decision based on facts and not on personalities, will make every decision better.

The third Ad Hoc Rules of Procedure meeting was, in some ways, the most chilling yet. It began with an argument over recording the meeting and went downhill from there. I strongly urge people to listen to 20:00 where the City Attorney uses a recent Supreme Court case to argue that the Council has an unlimited right to censure a member for basically any reason it chooses–including displaying any form of ‘dissent’ following the meeting or any form of ‘criticism’ of staff’. Though the term ‘staff’ was left undefined. There was also a lengthy discussion on ‘hats’. As the kids say, “Mask off.”