Candidate Forum - Being "Civil" ?

Last time we looked at the claim that the Council is “dysfunctional” and we gave support to the idea that we are not functioning normally – we are doing better than ever before. Click Here to go back and read the partial list of achievements. In a year we’ve achieved more than any other Council did in 4 years. More important, the city has never been in better shape –

• We are debt-free
• Our crime rate remains at an historic low level
• Many of our services and programs are nation leaders
• Sales tax is at an all-time high
• Unemployment is at an all-time low
• Vacancies are at an all-time low
• Ribbon cuttings are at an all-time high

Another one of Tettemer’s claims at the Candidate Forum last week is that the City Council is lacking in “civility”. He’s upset that members of this Council don’t get along. But what Tettemer doesn’t remember is just how un-civil past Councils have been. For example –

• One Council member took out a restraining order on another Council member after he hit her.
• One Council member wore a wire in an attempt to entrap another Council member.
• One Council member got into an unpleasant shouting match with the OC District Attorney.
• Three Council members voted, out of spite, to deny another Council member his turn at being Mayor.
• One Mayor put residents and staff in “time out” on multiple occasions.
• One Mayor abruptly ended a meeting because he was “miffed” with the residents
• Three Council members voted, over the years, to keep the two women Council members from being Mayor or Mayor ProTem, giving themselves the Mayor’s position multiple times.
• One Mayor made fun of the physical disability of another Council member.
• Three Council members voted to censure another Council member for something they thought he did.
• Two Council members got into shouting matches several times.
• One Council member referred to another Council member as a “moron”.
• One Council member got so disgusted with the behavior of his colleagues he resigned from the Council.
• One Council member got into a screaming match with a past Mayor of a neighboring city.
• Residents were threatened with Police arrest if they laughed
• Residents were told they couldn't even speak to each other while the meeting was in session.

BTW – Examples listed above include Mr. Tettemer's active participation on more than one occasion.

This is only a partial list of the foibles associated with previous City Councils. This City Council has had only one incident even remotely close to the examples listed about – when Scott Voigts yelled at a resident and called him a “paid political hack.” Other than this episode, the behavior of the 2018 City Council has been exemplary.

It is incredible to me that Tettemer, with his personal history and the history of the past City Councils, can make the claim that this City Council acts in an "uncivil" manner. The plain fact is that when we are in meetings we are the best behaved Council the City has ever had. You need only look at any of the videotapes of our Council meetings -

• No one (except Voigts) is screaming at the residents
• No one is calling each other names
• No one screams at invited guests
• We often disagree but we do so amiably

It's simply not true that this City Council is not being civil in our proceedings, just as it wasn't true when Tettemer said that this Council is "dysfunctional."

(Some people object to the fact that in social media I comment on the performance of my colleagues. That is outside my behavior on the dais and my behavior at city events, workshops, and seminars. I report when people do (or do not) attend events, how they vote, whether or not they vote in a manner consistent with what they promised, how much money they take (if any) from special interests, and whether or not what they say conforms to the evidence. I do all of this with the disclaimer that it doesn't represent any official comment and I do this because we live in the United State of America and we all have First Amendment rights. But my choice to exercise my First Amendment rights is almost always fact based. I point out who does or doesn't attend events, but I don't call the people who miss events "slackers". I point out who takes special interest money and the fact that it appears to violate the city's ethics code, but I don't call them "crooks" or "criminals". I point out the lies that people tell, or the promises they made which they didn't keep, but I don't call them "degenerates". etc.)

Tettemer makes the claims he does because apparently he has nothing else to say about how well we are doing, how well the City is doing, and just how much this Council, under my leadership has achieved. Apparently he believes we are doing very well and apparently he believes that many of the achievements are due to my initiative. So all he can gripe about is being "dysfunctional" (which we aren't) and not being "civil" (which we are).

There is one more claim from Tettemer I want to look at and we'll do that next time.