(a short and timely jotting for CCR twits Tweeters)
dwT #59: It’s really amazing. Even when wrong, mayor BVD reaches into her political trick bag of “spin” to defend an illegal meeting she conducted to name the city manager finalist, Steven Sarkozy, from Bellevue, Washington on January 17, 2014.
Backstory clue for the information impaired: Well, mayor BVD has called another of her infamous “Special Meetings.” The only difference this time is that this meeting should meet all the legal requirements to name and begin the contractual negotiations for a new city manager.
As previously noted, mayor BVD and her furless litter (Danish, Farris, Spink, Webb and LaMorgese) already performed this action illegally when they instructed (by consensus winking, nodding, throat clearing, mane flipping, or some other covert personal tic) that the city attorney start the negotiations process at her “Special Meeting” on January 17, 2014. The illegality of this meeting was documented as noted in the following article:
“But the city attorney was wrong, according to Bill Aleshire, an open-meetings lawyer in Austin who volunteers with the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas.
They can’t take a decision in executive session” without public notice, he said. “And from what you’re describing, it sounds like a decision was made. They’re negotiating with only one person. That direction had to come from somewhere.
Aleshire said the city needs to call a new meeting to discuss the candidates, vote for Sarkozy as the finalist and begin negotiations. Friday’s agenda simply read: “Personnel Matters — City Manager Interviews.” (DMN, Avi Selk, 1-21-14)
The question then becomes: Who are you going to believe -- an attorney skilled in determining violations of the Texas Open Meeting Act, or a showy politico bent only on protecting an image to save her backside from the wrath of voters and public opinion?
Sadly, mayor BVD accepts the latter category as she doesn’t cotton to accurate legal advice and has difficulty admitting when she is wrong...about anything. Instead, citizens are generally treated to spin responses that when parsed still leave one’s head reeling like a drunken sailor on shore leave.
mayor BVDs following comment concerning the hastily called February 5, 2014, “Special Meeting” is just disingenuous. If she and her furless litter really believed what she stated, then why did it take so long (and after being told the meeting previously conducted was illegal) to call another meeting to right the wrong committed? The answer: Like a trapped feral animal, a politico will say anything to make it appear that they are not wrong, or ‘shoot the messenger’ to deflect personal involvement, or hope their partisan supporters are drinking their allotment of politically-laced Kool-Aid when reading the newspaper.
“Mayor Beth Van Duyne requested Wednesday’s (2-5-14) vote. She defended the legality of the last meeting and said a vote to pick a finalist and begin contract negotiations would have happened much earlier if not for other council members’ obstinacy.” (DMN, Avi Selk, 1-31-14)
Really, mayor BVD?! Seriously? Do you expect voting citizens to swallow this political hogwash? Would it really be that difficult to admit that you allowed an illegal meeting to be conducted on January 17, 2014, and your “Special Meeting” for February 5, 2014 is to only add more kitty litter to the box for the actions you and your furless litter originally committed? It was not caused and certainly didn’t have anything to do with who was, or was not in attendance at the January 17, 2014 illegal meeting.
Would a reader dial 911? It appears that mayor BVD could be stalking the council chambers with her S&W #686 .357 Mag looking for three rogue, obstinate council members who want to do what is best for the city...that she perceives and believes is the cause for her irrational rationalization for conducting an illegal meeting.
ARTICLES: DMN, Avi Selk, 1-21-14 and 1-31-14
A note from counsel: Some “Tweets” from Dylan Westie, Executive Editor and Part-time Wordsmith for the CCR, have been injected with fabricated nouns, verbs, adjectives, conjunctions, adverbs, modifiers and maybe a few dangling participles….Mark Holbrook