The Attempt to Censure Myrna de Vera

At the November 13 council meeting, almost two hours was devoted to the question of whether to censure Myrna de Vera.    Many of Myrna’s supporters spoke out in her defense, but nothing they said spoke to the issue.    They said that the city has other issues.    They tried to turn the attention to the accusers.   Myrna’s lawyer deployed procedural gambits.

 I don’t wish to disappoint anyone by not, as I usually have in the past, falling into line.    Nonetheless:

 The city does have other issues, but that is NOT a reason to avoid discussion of censure.    The procedural roadblocks erected by Myrna’s lawyer are NOT a solution, but rather, an attempt to prevent a solution.

 On Tuesday, the attorney for the defendant (in a proceeding which has no defendant) continued to throw procedural tacks into the roadway of the censure process.    That can delay or derail the process, but it is not a resolution, and it aggravates the situation.

The last line of Tom Lochner’s article on the council’s November 13 discussion is this:  “Romero thereupon asked de Vera, ‘Councilwoman, do you want to make a statement of what occurred?’    De Vera replied, ‘Let me ask my legal counsel.’”    That was not the right response.

Like Sarah Creeley and the many other supporters of Myrna who spoke on Tuesday, I love Myrna, and probably more than most.    That is why I am so concerned about the harm that she is causing to herself by the manner in which she is dealing with this.    Myrna is our most valuable council member.    Her service is as important to the city as her friendship is to me.   I believe that her political career is heading toward self-immolation.

This entire process does say something awful about Dan Romero and the now-hideous Gérard Boulanger.    Previously, Pinocchieaux was an amiable fraud.    Now, he has recast himself as the twisted, nasty wretch who feels the need to take one last, vicious slap at one of his former tormenters, as the voters  push him out of the council chambers.    And Dan?    There’s nothing pretty about Javert.    Dan’s obsession with ensuring that Myrna suffer is a very ill omen for the new council.

None of that makes Myrna look better.   The September 25 apology was not an apology, because it included a disclaimer:    "Even though I did not tell the Pinole official to silence the citizen, and the Pinole city official did not direct HDR to do the same, and there is no evidence HDR forced Mr. Von Aspern to stop blogging, my actions have caused the perception of a concerted effort to stifle a citizen's free speech rights."

It is precisely because I DO care about Myrna, and do recognize her importance to the community, that I want to see this resolved.    What happened on Tuesday served only to raise the stakes, and the dangers.    Let’s pull off the bandage quickly, and get this over with.   However perverse may have been Pinocchieaux’s intent in launching this, it is now in flight, and must be dealt with.   Procedural objections from a lawyer, who has no place in a procedure which is not a trial, are the wrong answer.