A month ago, the council listened to the second attempt of the public speakers' requests to keep the 2009 city manager correspondence files from being destroyed. They were all reasoned arguments why it was better to keep these records after only two years. At this Feb. 15, 2012, Councilor Teresa Barth questioned the city clerk and asked that the motion to destroy records would make an exception with these city manager files to be kept an additional year for the new city manager to review and reassure the public that nothing of value would be lost.
The recommendation was reasonable, agreeable to the city manager and most of all, honored the public request. But this council majority was not going to have it and anyone paying attention can pretty much deduce there are some secrets buried there. Otherwise there would never be the public browbeating of City Manager Gus Vina. Even in the midst of this offensive display, Vina offers some credible compromise language to help allow a graceful exit from the pile-on. No, the council appeared bent on shoving him around. See for yourselves below.
Just two questions delivered with intensity:
"Are you interested in having the correspondence for the city manager kept for a period of time?"
"Have you looked into the file at all thus far?It sounds creepy as it is reminiscent of this interrogation:
"Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party of the United States?"Loud and clear, the answer is supposed to be, NO to both. It's calling out the head of the city’s government operations like a school boy by challenging his word, his integrity without warning or reason. The man is being grilled as though he has done something wrong. Take a look at the scripted monologue from the bully with the shiny clothes and shiny smiles.
"That’s why it seems appropriate that we do review with the city manager, for example, and see what’s important for you to have access for you to have. Because we can always make changes to that retention schedule based on the preference of the city manager. And that makes more sense to me. Because the whole point of these items coming before you and the different departments is so that you can take a look personally at what is needed. So I’m happy to keep them around here, but I just think it’s more appropriate to ask, see if it is valuable to you, because there is an expense associated with that. And if you’re saying it is not of value to you it seems odd to me that we are spending a dime of the taxpayer money to keep it knowing that you are not gonna’ access that file. So I guess your answer is important to me."Scripted to make sounds coming from her face seem like concern, respect, fiscally responsible and caring. Pretty twisted while insulting the council's unanimously selected city manager (and paid $240,000/year) while shredding people's democratic rights by deftly removing the public will completely from the decision. Nowhere in this monologue is the public’s right to documents. She is saying that it is only for the council majority to review with the manager. Public keep out. Anyone who feels differently, keep out.
*BARF
