Wednesday, October 12, 2016

CCR 10-12-16 Acting vs. Reacting

the   Controversial  Committee   Report
“We don’t raise sacred cows...we just butcher them.”

"Acting vs. Reacting"

   When is the mayor of Irving acting as the mayor of Irving and representing the city and all city council members?  When does the mayor, reacting on her own, make it appear to be acting on behalf of the city and city council?

   Sadly, this is difficult to answer as QueenB VD of the House of NPD and Royal Court of WAB and Protectorate of Red Meat TEA-carnivores and Standard Bearer WIMP may have a different standard which she appears to follow.  And that standard could be: I am the queen and in my autocracy I dictate that all photo ops, speaking engagements, or appearances represent my regal status in the city.  

   Ergo, she conceivably believes: "I am always representing the city and city council 24/7/365."  Really?

   And this, dear readers, could pose a serious future problem which may have heavy financial considerations to be paid by the city’s tax payers.

   As detailed in the September 28, 2016, CCR report, QueenB VD is being sued personally by The Clock King’s family.  And one has to guess, QueenB VD will want the city to absorb the total financial liability for any legal cost, or possible settlements…as the case moves forward.

   While Dylan Westie, Executive editor/Part-time wordsmith and Social Media Troll for the CCR, is still searching, for his Business Law Certificate from LaSalle Extension University, he did provide a few — almost legal — questions which might/should be asked before the Irving City council dives off the deep end and opens a legal defense war chest for QueenB VD.

  • Did QueenB VD state, on any Glenn Beck appearance, her comments represented her personal views/opinions and not those of the city or city council members?
  • Did QueenB VD state, when addressing all the TEA-party gatherings over the past year, she was representing her personal views/opinions and not those of the city or city council members?
  • Did QueenB VD state, when responding to any political query from a media outlet or appearance (DMN, Empower Texas, area Republican clubs, ACT for America, Texas Tribune, etc., etc.), that she was representing her personal views/opinions and not those of the city or city council members?
  • Should Irving tax payers be responsible for paying any legal cost if an individual is speaking/acting on the basis of their personal political philosophy which was not endorsed by the city council, or relative to city operations?
  • Shouldn’t QueenB VD, when presenting a particular view or opinion on a subject as mayor, be representing only policy the city council has approved?

   It would probably be conceded QueenB VD has been invited to speak, for many of her political appearances, due to her governmental title as mayor of the City of Irving.  However, when one reviews the venues where she was speaking, being quoted, or appearing, the above questions become even more appropriate to ask.  

   Did she specifically state, to those present or listening, she was appearing/speaking as an individual and not the mayor of Irving?  Did she relate her comments and opinions were not the policy of the Irving City council?

   While the answers to those questions will be the foundation for any decision the city council, city’s legal staff, and city manager should make on the personal law suit against QueenB VD, there is one additional issue to be considered.

   The issue, of this personal law suit against QueenB VD and any possible city ramifications, deserves to be discussed — for total transparency purposes — in the public domain as a public input agenda item.  The decision, as to the city’s course of action, should not be made in executive session!  To do otherwise will be a total violation of the public’s trust and right to know how their elected representatives are responding. 

   After all, tax payers shouldn’t be ‘on the hook’ for the queen’s personal actions, statements, babbling at TEA-party gatherings, or public appearances which had little or no relevance to city operations, policy, or council approval.

   Fairly soon, the city council will discuss, in executive session, the current status of this personal law suit against QueenB VD.  One would hope there is clarity of thinking on the council’s part to ensure the public’s interest is met and handled without political spin or kowtowing to any political pressures or campaign donors by the queen’s Sugar Daddy handlers.

   And when the council considers what appropriate action might be taken on this personal law suit against QueenB VD, they hopefully will remember the queen was fully responsible, along with her sycophant TEA-party advisers — State representatives Rodney "Bogus-gate Complaint" Anderson and Matt "Squeaky" Rinaldi — for State HB 562 laying the ground work for what later created tremendous turmoil in the city.  
   (And dear readers, the gun toting Froot Loops® and KKK visitors wasn’t a pretty sight in ‘beautiful downtown Irving.’) 

   Does QueenB VD believe the 5-4 vote, of the tepid supporting Council resolution, for the disingenuous State HB 562 — which she vigorously championed — provided her with the authority to spout any number of fabricated facts as if the resolution was even relevant to city affairs?

   After the State HB 562 fiasco, The Clock King incident at MacArthur HS provided additional opportunities for QueenB VD to prance, flip her mane, and avail herself for more photo ops while babbling her TEA-party rhetoric which was not germane as being city policy, or action items approved by the city council.

   Long story short: QueenB VD has, in several arenas over the past year, uttered and stated items/concerns which should be her personal opinions as they have not been presented to the Irving City council for consideration, discussion, or approval.

   If this proves to be the case, shouldn’t one believe QueenB VD is not entitled to have city funds provided to represent her in this personal law suit?

   After all, the Irving City council has never sponsored a resolution stating the city will be guided or governed by TEA-party dogma or doctrine.  And QueenB VDs touring the north Texas area speaking and being recognized as the mayor of the city should not make the city liable for any fact fabrications, statements or actions she may have made or taken in those endeavors.

   Let your city council representative know you do not favor city tax funds being spent to represent what could be the highly political and personal interest of QueenB VD when speaking and appearing before sycophant groups to achieve the next step on her self-aggrandizing political ladder.*

   This is her party and the city SHOULD NOT be on her dance card!

…………………….………….Mark Holbrook 

*  Perhaps, when QueenB VD attended the Donald Trump fund raiser (groping?) in Dallas on 10-11-16, she should have trolled the elite benefactors to initiate and establish a personal legal defense fund.  If the Irving City council acts responsibly, she — not the city — would need the bucks to defend her actions and statements in the personal law suit filed against her by The Clock King’s family.