Disclaimer: everything contained in this blog is MY OPINION. Every attempt is made to present the truth through actual facts or to identify statements which are in doubt; otherwise, there will be no deliberate presentation of gossip, rumor, or innuendo which cannot be proven as factual.
It seems that certain members of the powers-that-be have finally glommed onto the fact that their willful and probably illegal actions might get them in official and very public trouble.
As so many of us believe and have pointed out-repeatedly-the resolution taken by the city commission to fire the now-ex-police chief was illegal. We have also repeatedly stated WHY it was illegal according to both our city charter and state law. In fact, this was brought to the commissioners' attention long before the commission took its final action on the resolution.
With the exception of one, namely Pam Ward, they refused to acknowledge either the charter's rules or the citizens' protests, or the advice of the then-city attorney not to do it. No, they got the bit in their pearly teeth and went right ahead.
At the moment, with voter approval of the city charter amendment providing for the dismissal of a commissioner, it appears that everyone wants to make just one person the scapegoat for the whole debacle involving the Police Department and various other iffy and outrageous actions. This simply isn't right.
It seems one member of the commission stated that he would vote however the people wanted him to: but despite well over 200 signatures supporting the PD, versus 2 against, plus huge opposition to the commission's actions from the citizens, he voted in favor of firing the police chief. How can we believe him?
Another commissioner, apparently unwilling to think for himself, announced that he'd vote however the previous member of the commission voted. But then, this is the commissioner who said the city charter is "just a piece of paper" and proceeded to prove it by overriding the laws laid down in that "piece of paper." (Which leads us to another interesting question: what if this commissioner decides to override or ignore the new amendment providing for the ousting of a city commissioner?)
Yet another commissioner also looked to be unwilling to exercise independent thought and, although there may have been a hidden agenda, appeared to play follow-the-leader.
Then we come to the one everyone seems to want to use the charter amendment to chuck out of office. That commissioner may have been the instigator of the whole disgraceful and scandalous proceedings, BUT the other three went right along with it-enthusiastically adding their 2 cents worth as they went along.
Those four are all equally guilty.
Now it's said the ex-attorney is in serious trouble, brought about by what appeared to me to be a highly edited set-up involving entrapment, which unfortunately made it to YouTube. So, scenting blood in the water, shark-like, it looks like these officials are indulging in both blood lust and CYA, and are attempting to blame the ex-attorney for their actions instead of taking the responsibility and blame on themselves where it belongs.
Anita Huguelet McMurtrie
No comments:
New comments are not allowed.