This will be a short post. City of Woodway City Secretary Jennifer Canady sent me an email today. She recalculated the cost of the investigation into Yost Zahkary and noted the original number of $71,000+ was inaccurate. The new figure has been revised to $67, 846. This is still roughly 3 times the amount offered publicly by Mayor Weber, and as such, changes little - the implications and dynamics are still the same. Jennifer did apologize for the mistake.
As a believer in the truth, I wanted to put this out as soon as possible. Thanks and talk to you soon.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Sunday, October 10, 2010
One Step Forward, Two Steps Back
I apologize. To all the readers of my blog, I apologize for not posting in a number of weeks. I promised to and didn't, so that is my fault. I'm sorry and ask for your forgiveness.
The truth is I was hoping that after my last posting, I wouldn't have to keep throwing the facts and truth boldly out to readers. I was hoping the city council would follow through with healing their relationship with the city manager, healing their relationship with honest citizens, and responding boldly to MOB and KOB. Sadly, three events in the last two weeks have revealed otherwise.
The first event deals with the city council's response letter to Michael O'Bric's "Thank You" letter. If you read MOB's "Thank You" letter, you know that once again he listed lies, speaking about unsubstantiated "affidavits" and "reports" not used by the independent council investigating City Manager Yost. The council should be encouraged for rebutting this round of MOB's lies and distortion of the facts. They should be encouraged for publicly recognizing that the Knight Report concluded that pre-election management of Woodway was much better than most cities of comparable size. Finally the council should be encouraged for plainly stating that third party anonymous claims will not be given attention in the future. These three statements have positive value for our city and the truth.
What defies explanation is their opening statement " Thank you for your input and comments".
Each council member signed their name to this letter, so citizens have no choice but to believe each one meant to thank MOB. So let's be frank. After all that's happened, why is Bill Weber, Gil Lillard, Donald Baker, Jane Kittner, Scott Giddings, Chuck Gardner, and Paul Scibielski thanking a man for defamatory input and comments? Why are they thanking a man who repeatedly lied to the council and citizens of Woodway for his own selfish purposes? Why are they thanking a man who never provided one shred of proof for any of his 60+ wild allegations, even after this same council repeatedly asked for it? Why thank a man who, with council approval, ended up costing the city and ultimately the citizens tens of thousands of dollars and months of lost time? WHY VALIDATE HIM AGAIN?
The second troubling event was this - a false reporting by the council of the cost of Yost's investigation. During the special council meeting called to reveal the results of Mr. Knight's report, Mayor Weber announced the cost of the investigation was approximately $23,000-25,000. He also announced that the council felt like it was money well spent. What he didn't say is that the $23,000-25,000 was a partial cost -- it only represented Mr. Knight's fee. To be fair to the Mayor, other council member's have since made public statements that it was money well spent. Why is this a problem? It's a problem for a couple of reasons. First, it smacks of dishonesty. The Mayor and council knew that the city also spent money with city attorneys and that city employees expended a large amount of time searching through files collecting the facts and figures required to investigate the 60+ allegations. Since this is not a part of their normal duties, employee time spent on the investigation equals money spent on the investigation.
Hoping the council would self-correct this figure, I waited almost two months. They took no action, even when they knew it was wrong. So I filed an open records request to determine the real total cost.
Guess what? The grand total comes out to a whopping $71,119.79. Folks, that is almost three times the amount announced to the city and media cameras. How did the council feel good about spending $71,000+ when they would only admit to $23,000+?
The final event, the final straw, is a promise broken. Back in June, before the sitting council empowered Mr Knight to investigate Yost Zahkary, I shared a piece of evidence with the city council during an open meeting. That information pointed to Karen O'Bric's mismanagement of funds while she was manager of the Arboretum. As a former councilman and liaison to the Arboretum Board, I had access to Arboretum records and made the discovery during my last weeks as a councilman. Unlike MOB, the city has actual proof of her mismanagement in their records. I asked the council for Karen's past management to be investigated. I returned to the council a month later and was given assurance the city was working on this matter. I reminded the council that they had set a precedent, and they must be equitable in their treatment of all employees, even if it was an investigation. What I did not know at this point was that MOB had never produced one piece of evidence for his claims. Of additional interest is the fact that each council meeting agenda, during Yost's investigation, listed an update on the investigation of Yost based on allegations by a citizen (singular). Not citizens, but a citizen (MOB).
Again I waited a couple of months and at the last council meeting in September asked for the results of their investigation of KOB. The council stated they would put it on the agenda for the following week. When that meeting came, Oct 4th, the city took no action, pulling it off the agenda after bringing it up. Amazing. Dumbfounding.
This is painful for me to write. Painful because we still have poor choices being made by our leaders. Painful for me personally because fidelity to truth and principal forces me to call out all council members, some who I consider good friends. Painful to see that double standards still exist with our council. I was ready to walk away without listing MOB's influence on each candidate, but once again feel obligated to do it. One may surprise you.
I encourage you, the reader, to ask your council members about the double standard investigating managers, their thanking MOB for his comments, and why they didn't come forward with the real cost of the Yost investigation - $71,000+. Stay involved --- your city needs your help. Be well.
The truth is I was hoping that after my last posting, I wouldn't have to keep throwing the facts and truth boldly out to readers. I was hoping the city council would follow through with healing their relationship with the city manager, healing their relationship with honest citizens, and responding boldly to MOB and KOB. Sadly, three events in the last two weeks have revealed otherwise.
The first event deals with the city council's response letter to Michael O'Bric's "Thank You" letter. If you read MOB's "Thank You" letter, you know that once again he listed lies, speaking about unsubstantiated "affidavits" and "reports" not used by the independent council investigating City Manager Yost. The council should be encouraged for rebutting this round of MOB's lies and distortion of the facts. They should be encouraged for publicly recognizing that the Knight Report concluded that pre-election management of Woodway was much better than most cities of comparable size. Finally the council should be encouraged for plainly stating that third party anonymous claims will not be given attention in the future. These three statements have positive value for our city and the truth.
What defies explanation is their opening statement " Thank you for your input and comments".
Each council member signed their name to this letter, so citizens have no choice but to believe each one meant to thank MOB. So let's be frank. After all that's happened, why is Bill Weber, Gil Lillard, Donald Baker, Jane Kittner, Scott Giddings, Chuck Gardner, and Paul Scibielski thanking a man for defamatory input and comments? Why are they thanking a man who repeatedly lied to the council and citizens of Woodway for his own selfish purposes? Why are they thanking a man who never provided one shred of proof for any of his 60+ wild allegations, even after this same council repeatedly asked for it? Why thank a man who, with council approval, ended up costing the city and ultimately the citizens tens of thousands of dollars and months of lost time? WHY VALIDATE HIM AGAIN?
The second troubling event was this - a false reporting by the council of the cost of Yost's investigation. During the special council meeting called to reveal the results of Mr. Knight's report, Mayor Weber announced the cost of the investigation was approximately $23,000-25,000. He also announced that the council felt like it was money well spent. What he didn't say is that the $23,000-25,000 was a partial cost -- it only represented Mr. Knight's fee. To be fair to the Mayor, other council member's have since made public statements that it was money well spent. Why is this a problem? It's a problem for a couple of reasons. First, it smacks of dishonesty. The Mayor and council knew that the city also spent money with city attorneys and that city employees expended a large amount of time searching through files collecting the facts and figures required to investigate the 60+ allegations. Since this is not a part of their normal duties, employee time spent on the investigation equals money spent on the investigation.
Hoping the council would self-correct this figure, I waited almost two months. They took no action, even when they knew it was wrong. So I filed an open records request to determine the real total cost.
Guess what? The grand total comes out to a whopping $71,119.79. Folks, that is almost three times the amount announced to the city and media cameras. How did the council feel good about spending $71,000+ when they would only admit to $23,000+?
The final event, the final straw, is a promise broken. Back in June, before the sitting council empowered Mr Knight to investigate Yost Zahkary, I shared a piece of evidence with the city council during an open meeting. That information pointed to Karen O'Bric's mismanagement of funds while she was manager of the Arboretum. As a former councilman and liaison to the Arboretum Board, I had access to Arboretum records and made the discovery during my last weeks as a councilman. Unlike MOB, the city has actual proof of her mismanagement in their records. I asked the council for Karen's past management to be investigated. I returned to the council a month later and was given assurance the city was working on this matter. I reminded the council that they had set a precedent, and they must be equitable in their treatment of all employees, even if it was an investigation. What I did not know at this point was that MOB had never produced one piece of evidence for his claims. Of additional interest is the fact that each council meeting agenda, during Yost's investigation, listed an update on the investigation of Yost based on allegations by a citizen (singular). Not citizens, but a citizen (MOB).
Again I waited a couple of months and at the last council meeting in September asked for the results of their investigation of KOB. The council stated they would put it on the agenda for the following week. When that meeting came, Oct 4th, the city took no action, pulling it off the agenda after bringing it up. Amazing. Dumbfounding.
This is painful for me to write. Painful because we still have poor choices being made by our leaders. Painful for me personally because fidelity to truth and principal forces me to call out all council members, some who I consider good friends. Painful to see that double standards still exist with our council. I was ready to walk away without listing MOB's influence on each candidate, but once again feel obligated to do it. One may surprise you.
I encourage you, the reader, to ask your council members about the double standard investigating managers, their thanking MOB for his comments, and why they didn't come forward with the real cost of the Yost investigation - $71,000+. Stay involved --- your city needs your help. Be well.
Friday, September 17, 2010
A Teaching Opportunity
I want to start this blog entry with a thank you. I want to thank Councilman Chuck Garner for giving me this teachable opportunity. Yes I know that it is he, not me, who is a college professor. But his recent blog titled "Correcting a Misconception" opens this door for me. If you haven't read Chuck's blog I encourage you to do so - especially before reading this entry.
The core premise of "Correcting a Misconception" by Chuck is that I(Robert) "find evil intentions where they don't exist to assume the worst about people when you(Robert) don't really know them." He then cautions "that Mike O'Bric fell into that trap" and " to some extent I (Chuck) did too during my campaign and for a while after." He closes with " But don't you and I both know better now?". With that, let the teaching begin.
I may struggle with format here, but will endeavor to provide a number of teachable moments for Chuck's benefit. Maybe it is best to lay some foundational truths.
Foundational Truths
Truth---What I have openly said is that MOB invested in the four new members campaigns, through differing combination of funds, in-kind contributions, and time. Three of four had identical campaign signs, I personally saw MOB putting out all their signs, their mailed campaign flyers had the same bulk mail stamp ( thank you CSI), two candidates directly listed MOB on their mandatory fund reports, etc. Chuck Garner is one of those beneficiaries.
Truth----Gil Lillard told another former council member, Rodney Kroll, that this group had met to strategize (pre-election).
Truth----MOB stated his agenda through numerous mailed letters, and in a campaign flyer with all four of the new members name on it. They are all aware of his effort and contributions on their part, all were aware of his goals. To say otherwise is dishonest.
Truth----I have repeatedly said that the council ( not new or old members, but the council as a whole) should never have spent tens of thousands of the taxpayer's money for the external investigation once the internal investigation found no basis of MOBs allegations. Ask Councilmen Don Baker or Scott Giddenings, men I consider friends, and they will tell you I disagree with their vote and logic.
Truth---The council members by profession: Garner- college professor with a doctorate degree in science, Weber--a retired general and now CEO of a private enterprise, Scibielski --a medical doctor, Kitner an architect, Baker a lawyer, Giddings a sales manager, and Lillard owner of an insurance office. All professions that require intelligence and discipline to reach their respective level of success. All work in fields that require careful study of a situation before making statements that affect others.
Truth---Although not public information, MOB was given multiple deadlines by the city council to produce evidence for his allegations. He never produced any evidence.
Truth---It is historical that people/entities donate time and money to politicians in return for influence and the promise that a message they believe in will be carried forward by the candidate.
Truth--- Chuck wrote in his blog about voting a "Party Line".
Truth--- The four new members voted purposely to exclude any member with experience from leadership. The way they did it reveals that it was planned prior to the meeting.
Truth--- Before the first council meeting, Chuck writes that it is rumored that a high city official is putting out a rumor against the new members. He asks for those that support the change that the NEW council members represent to come to the meeting in a show of numbers. Additional words used communicate indignation that someone would lie about him.
Truth---The rumor above came from MOB, not a high city official.
Truth---The sitting city council has yet to reveal the true actual cost of the investigation.
Truth---In his blog, Chuck states MOB, at the first council meeting, asked that Yost be investigated. He now states that is not the reason for Yost's investigation, yet the written council meeting agendas state the investigation is based on allegations made by a Citizen ( singular).
Truth---I went before the council and gave a small piece of evidence of Karen denying the city funding via her handling of revenues at the Arboretum while she was manager. This request was made in June,before the vote to seek an independent council to investigate the baseless allegations against Yost. I was promised an investigation with results made public. The lack of council action demonstrates a double standard and discrimination.
Truth---Chuck's blog left out the admission by Gil Lillard, in open council, that he would discriminate against me and not allow the same amount of time allowed MOB to speak at the first meeting.
Truth---I must stop here or I won't get to the lesson.
Teaching about Character
Chuck, I don't believe you know better. I honestly don't. You model a situational ethics system that believes ethics can shift to best suit your benefit. Look at your words and actions since last March. You ran to remove Yost from office. Before taking office you acknowledged that fact publicly in the paper but backtracked and said you would be more thoughtful. Yet before taking office you, an elected official, spoke of an anonymous rumor from the city manager and get excited that he would portray you unfairly. As a candidate you received an ethics statement (that you should have signed) saying among other things that you would not campaign using false information. Yet you quote an inflated dollar amount for the last municipal building built. The dollar amount you used was supplied by Michael O'Bric, the same figure he used. You intimate no voter knew about the building, yet I have pulled from the Trib archive a full page article to the contrary. When I personally brought up Karen O'Brics misdeeds and asked for her investigation, how did you respond? Did you make any effort walk across the street and look at records? No, the first thing you did was quote the O'Brics as the clearing source of information on your blog. Then you had to annotate 3 additional entries due to your error, yet never do you say you made a mistake. After taking office you write the argument that too many appointments have been made to past councils, insinuating they are timed to "unexpected resignations". When I respond with why that practice was used successfully in the past, showed how it had value and saved the city money, you once again add additional notes to backtrack on your previous entry. I could go on, but let me leave you with this final fact--that after the council had received Mr. Knights report you wrote an email trying to convince other council members to temper the response that Mayor Weber would put forward. Two huge problems here- one you are months into your councilship and you are violating the rules of closed session by publicly discussing this issue via email. Secondly, it reveals you still aren't accepting the results for what they are. Yet here you are, trying to sell me on the fact you were unanimous in your spirit and actions.
Now the damning part of all this is your post "Correcting a Misconception". Damning in the fact that I believe you believe your own inventions. You want citizens to think you were working hard to solve a problem that existed before you came on council. You leave out the fact that you helped create the problem, you helped inflame the allegations with your door to door comments on the campaign trail. You want citizens to believe because a college instructor makes a comfortable living, that means you're above influence. Yet time and again you did not investigate public records, but instead used information supplied by Michael O'Bric as your definitive resource. You publicly ran City Manager/Police Chief Yost through a professional and personal wringer, but now worry about your own image to the point of rewriting your political history. You use language to make things easier for your ego to deal with your poor choices ---"virtually no contact with Mike O'Bric"-- " to some extent I did too". You have a doctorate in science, a field that requires discipline and research. Yet all that was absent when you met Mike O'Bric, and he somehow "tricked" you ( without any proof as we all now know).
Chuck, this is my opinion, but you are too smart to be tricked by the outrageous claims of MOB. You no more believed a public official could take 100 days of vacation anymore than you believe a college professor could take 100 days of vacation. I believe you wanted either the position or power so bad that you "drank the koolaid" ( Jim Jones reference). At a minimum you were flat out lazy -- Do Baylor students pass your course with the bad data/no research approach you've modeled? Finally, you counseling me about MOB is just, well embarrassing. For you. I suggest you don't lecture anyone about acting like MOB with your history.
This would not be a teachable moment unless I offered you a successful path, give you the correct answers. If you will model these behavior's, people will start to respect you and possibly believe what you say. Here are the Top 10 Behaviors to Model:
1. Do Your Homework - When a subject comes up, don't be lazy. As a councilman, you have access to public records. Do your homework.
2. Stay Away from Rumors- Don't spread rumors. As an elected official, deal with the facts. To help, see bullet point #1 above.
3. Look People in the Eye and Talk Straight - Stay away from "kinda" "sorta" statements; if you don't know the answer, tell people so and promise to get the answer. See #1 again.
4. Hold Yourself to the Same Standards and Actions You Expect From Others - If you call for someone to be judged, be ready to be judged for your choices. Look down the road before pulling the trigger.
5. Don't Trade the Long Term Benefits of Others for Your Short Term Personal Gain.
6. When You're Wrong, Apologize without Conditions - Like a compliment that goes " I like your hair, BUT.." a weak apology is seen as no apology. Mend you fences with the strength of a sincere, heartfelt response. Paul did it, and you can too.
7. Understand that Reputations are Earned not Reported or Painted.
8. Do the Right Thing Even When it's Not Popular.
9. Never Hide Behind the Group - Never vote for or against something that you wouldn't do if voting alone.
10. Know What's a Conflict of Interest and Abstain - In public life, there are legal limits and ethical limits. If you take money from someone, it is not enough to say "I'm above reproach". You must refrain from voting on that person. If that bothers you, then you shouldn't take their money in the first place.
Chuck, the city needs honest, ethical servants that are comfortable with the truth. Earn a good reputation and I will support you. Stay with your current ways and expect opposition. If you really care about healing, apologize to Yost the way you investigated him - PUBLICLY.
"Chemically" speaking, you now have the formula for honor, respect, and restoration. Mixing the right ingredients in the right way is required. We'll be watching for the proper reaction.
Next Blog, I will provide the report of MOB's support.
The core premise of "Correcting a Misconception" by Chuck is that I(Robert) "find evil intentions where they don't exist to assume the worst about people when you(Robert) don't really know them." He then cautions "that Mike O'Bric fell into that trap" and " to some extent I (Chuck) did too during my campaign and for a while after." He closes with " But don't you and I both know better now?". With that, let the teaching begin.
I may struggle with format here, but will endeavor to provide a number of teachable moments for Chuck's benefit. Maybe it is best to lay some foundational truths.
Foundational Truths
Truth---What I have openly said is that MOB invested in the four new members campaigns, through differing combination of funds, in-kind contributions, and time. Three of four had identical campaign signs, I personally saw MOB putting out all their signs, their mailed campaign flyers had the same bulk mail stamp ( thank you CSI), two candidates directly listed MOB on their mandatory fund reports, etc. Chuck Garner is one of those beneficiaries.
Truth----Gil Lillard told another former council member, Rodney Kroll, that this group had met to strategize (pre-election).
Truth----MOB stated his agenda through numerous mailed letters, and in a campaign flyer with all four of the new members name on it. They are all aware of his effort and contributions on their part, all were aware of his goals. To say otherwise is dishonest.
Truth----I have repeatedly said that the council ( not new or old members, but the council as a whole) should never have spent tens of thousands of the taxpayer's money for the external investigation once the internal investigation found no basis of MOBs allegations. Ask Councilmen Don Baker or Scott Giddenings, men I consider friends, and they will tell you I disagree with their vote and logic.
Truth---The council members by profession: Garner- college professor with a doctorate degree in science, Weber--a retired general and now CEO of a private enterprise, Scibielski --a medical doctor, Kitner an architect, Baker a lawyer, Giddings a sales manager, and Lillard owner of an insurance office. All professions that require intelligence and discipline to reach their respective level of success. All work in fields that require careful study of a situation before making statements that affect others.
Truth---Although not public information, MOB was given multiple deadlines by the city council to produce evidence for his allegations. He never produced any evidence.
Truth---It is historical that people/entities donate time and money to politicians in return for influence and the promise that a message they believe in will be carried forward by the candidate.
Truth--- Chuck wrote in his blog about voting a "Party Line".
Truth--- The four new members voted purposely to exclude any member with experience from leadership. The way they did it reveals that it was planned prior to the meeting.
Truth--- Before the first council meeting, Chuck writes that it is rumored that a high city official is putting out a rumor against the new members. He asks for those that support the change that the NEW council members represent to come to the meeting in a show of numbers. Additional words used communicate indignation that someone would lie about him.
Truth---The rumor above came from MOB, not a high city official.
Truth---The sitting city council has yet to reveal the true actual cost of the investigation.
Truth---In his blog, Chuck states MOB, at the first council meeting, asked that Yost be investigated. He now states that is not the reason for Yost's investigation, yet the written council meeting agendas state the investigation is based on allegations made by a Citizen ( singular).
Truth---I went before the council and gave a small piece of evidence of Karen denying the city funding via her handling of revenues at the Arboretum while she was manager. This request was made in June,before the vote to seek an independent council to investigate the baseless allegations against Yost. I was promised an investigation with results made public. The lack of council action demonstrates a double standard and discrimination.
Truth---Chuck's blog left out the admission by Gil Lillard, in open council, that he would discriminate against me and not allow the same amount of time allowed MOB to speak at the first meeting.
Truth---I must stop here or I won't get to the lesson.
Teaching about Character
Chuck, I don't believe you know better. I honestly don't. You model a situational ethics system that believes ethics can shift to best suit your benefit. Look at your words and actions since last March. You ran to remove Yost from office. Before taking office you acknowledged that fact publicly in the paper but backtracked and said you would be more thoughtful. Yet before taking office you, an elected official, spoke of an anonymous rumor from the city manager and get excited that he would portray you unfairly. As a candidate you received an ethics statement (that you should have signed) saying among other things that you would not campaign using false information. Yet you quote an inflated dollar amount for the last municipal building built. The dollar amount you used was supplied by Michael O'Bric, the same figure he used. You intimate no voter knew about the building, yet I have pulled from the Trib archive a full page article to the contrary. When I personally brought up Karen O'Brics misdeeds and asked for her investigation, how did you respond? Did you make any effort walk across the street and look at records? No, the first thing you did was quote the O'Brics as the clearing source of information on your blog. Then you had to annotate 3 additional entries due to your error, yet never do you say you made a mistake. After taking office you write the argument that too many appointments have been made to past councils, insinuating they are timed to "unexpected resignations". When I respond with why that practice was used successfully in the past, showed how it had value and saved the city money, you once again add additional notes to backtrack on your previous entry. I could go on, but let me leave you with this final fact--that after the council had received Mr. Knights report you wrote an email trying to convince other council members to temper the response that Mayor Weber would put forward. Two huge problems here- one you are months into your councilship and you are violating the rules of closed session by publicly discussing this issue via email. Secondly, it reveals you still aren't accepting the results for what they are. Yet here you are, trying to sell me on the fact you were unanimous in your spirit and actions.
Now the damning part of all this is your post "Correcting a Misconception". Damning in the fact that I believe you believe your own inventions. You want citizens to think you were working hard to solve a problem that existed before you came on council. You leave out the fact that you helped create the problem, you helped inflame the allegations with your door to door comments on the campaign trail. You want citizens to believe because a college instructor makes a comfortable living, that means you're above influence. Yet time and again you did not investigate public records, but instead used information supplied by Michael O'Bric as your definitive resource. You publicly ran City Manager/Police Chief Yost through a professional and personal wringer, but now worry about your own image to the point of rewriting your political history. You use language to make things easier for your ego to deal with your poor choices ---"virtually no contact with Mike O'Bric"-- " to some extent I did too". You have a doctorate in science, a field that requires discipline and research. Yet all that was absent when you met Mike O'Bric, and he somehow "tricked" you ( without any proof as we all now know).
Chuck, this is my opinion, but you are too smart to be tricked by the outrageous claims of MOB. You no more believed a public official could take 100 days of vacation anymore than you believe a college professor could take 100 days of vacation. I believe you wanted either the position or power so bad that you "drank the koolaid" ( Jim Jones reference). At a minimum you were flat out lazy -- Do Baylor students pass your course with the bad data/no research approach you've modeled? Finally, you counseling me about MOB is just, well embarrassing. For you. I suggest you don't lecture anyone about acting like MOB with your history.
This would not be a teachable moment unless I offered you a successful path, give you the correct answers. If you will model these behavior's, people will start to respect you and possibly believe what you say. Here are the Top 10 Behaviors to Model:
1. Do Your Homework - When a subject comes up, don't be lazy. As a councilman, you have access to public records. Do your homework.
2. Stay Away from Rumors- Don't spread rumors. As an elected official, deal with the facts. To help, see bullet point #1 above.
3. Look People in the Eye and Talk Straight - Stay away from "kinda" "sorta" statements; if you don't know the answer, tell people so and promise to get the answer. See #1 again.
4. Hold Yourself to the Same Standards and Actions You Expect From Others - If you call for someone to be judged, be ready to be judged for your choices. Look down the road before pulling the trigger.
5. Don't Trade the Long Term Benefits of Others for Your Short Term Personal Gain.
6. When You're Wrong, Apologize without Conditions - Like a compliment that goes " I like your hair, BUT.." a weak apology is seen as no apology. Mend you fences with the strength of a sincere, heartfelt response. Paul did it, and you can too.
7. Understand that Reputations are Earned not Reported or Painted.
8. Do the Right Thing Even When it's Not Popular.
9. Never Hide Behind the Group - Never vote for or against something that you wouldn't do if voting alone.
10. Know What's a Conflict of Interest and Abstain - In public life, there are legal limits and ethical limits. If you take money from someone, it is not enough to say "I'm above reproach". You must refrain from voting on that person. If that bothers you, then you shouldn't take their money in the first place.
Chuck, the city needs honest, ethical servants that are comfortable with the truth. Earn a good reputation and I will support you. Stay with your current ways and expect opposition. If you really care about healing, apologize to Yost the way you investigated him - PUBLICLY.
"Chemically" speaking, you now have the formula for honor, respect, and restoration. Mixing the right ingredients in the right way is required. We'll be watching for the proper reaction.
Next Blog, I will provide the report of MOB's support.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
He's Back
Dear readers, sorry for taking so long to get this out.
Local liar and bad guy, MOB, is back. He has written ANOTHER letter, this time kindly thanking the council for validating him by way of the independent investigation.
Any apologies for wasting the citizens of Woodway's money on his lies? Nope. Any apologies to Yost for slander? Nope. Any remorse for his actions? Of course not. His "gracious" letter is a thank you note to the mayor and council for acting on his lies and slander without him having to provide one single piece of evidence.
Strange, this is the same MOBster that did not have the courage to show up at the council meeting when the results were presented. This is the same MOBster that claims to speak for the Woodway majority, yet he must protect this group and not reveal their identities.
Folks, this is Mike O'Bric 101. The only rules he wants to follow are his own, the only "Truth" is in his head. But why the "nice" tone of this letter, when all others have been venom?
He still wants the city to settle his wife's lawsuit against Yost and the city. Not only will Karen profit if that happens, but he will too. They share and share alike. Also, he doesn't want the city to look into Karen's improprieties as manager at the Arboretum. Not only would that hurt her lawsuit against the city, but she could conceivably become the defendant of a lawsuit by the city to demand rightful funds she withheld for personal gain. Unlike the MOBster's wild claims, there is evidence of her questionable actions in the city records -- I have seen it.
But probably the most immediate reason is MOB believes he has friends on the council. He contributed to their campaigns, directly and indirectly. Some have acknowledged this, some have not claimed his contribution or tried to hide it. He also invested personal time in their campaigns to be elected, and greeted them at a victory party.
Yes, the MOBster believes he has friends on the council - and why not? Have you heard any of the new members publicly state they stand against MOB and his agenda? No? Have any publicly said they will not tolerate his lies? Have you heard any of them state that Michael O'Bric and those that donated to his cause should reimburse the city for the cost of the independent investigation? No? Then ask yourself a simple question..... WHY NOT?
The mayor stated the independent investigation cost $25,000 -- that is not true. That only represents the portion of the bill by Barney Knight. To be accurate, it must include money spent with the two city attorneys, as well as time spent by city employees gathering information. My best guess is $40,000 to $60,000. This is a huge amount of taxpayer money just to provide a second investigation of the internal investigation which also found no merit to the allegations. Remember that internal investigation was directed and managed by the new council.
The time has come for the city council to "man up". The council was so relieved to walk away from this matter that they forgot a crucial part of the healing process. They must now speak up for their actions as individuals and not hide behind a group dynamic. They must state their relationship to MOB past, present, and future. If they don't, the MOBster will hang around and ask them for more time, unjustified injury, and money to be spent for his evil crusade.
The council spent thousands and thousands of our tax dollars on this wild goose chase, even after some ran on a platform to bring integrity and financial responsibility to city leadership. Since they are reluctant to be forth coming, I will do my part to help them find personal integrity. In my next blog I will layout how much money and funds each member of the council received, new and returning members, and how MOB was involved.
Local liar and bad guy, MOB, is back. He has written ANOTHER letter, this time kindly thanking the council for validating him by way of the independent investigation.
Any apologies for wasting the citizens of Woodway's money on his lies? Nope. Any apologies to Yost for slander? Nope. Any remorse for his actions? Of course not. His "gracious" letter is a thank you note to the mayor and council for acting on his lies and slander without him having to provide one single piece of evidence.
Strange, this is the same MOBster that did not have the courage to show up at the council meeting when the results were presented. This is the same MOBster that claims to speak for the Woodway majority, yet he must protect this group and not reveal their identities.
Folks, this is Mike O'Bric 101. The only rules he wants to follow are his own, the only "Truth" is in his head. But why the "nice" tone of this letter, when all others have been venom?
He still wants the city to settle his wife's lawsuit against Yost and the city. Not only will Karen profit if that happens, but he will too. They share and share alike. Also, he doesn't want the city to look into Karen's improprieties as manager at the Arboretum. Not only would that hurt her lawsuit against the city, but she could conceivably become the defendant of a lawsuit by the city to demand rightful funds she withheld for personal gain. Unlike the MOBster's wild claims, there is evidence of her questionable actions in the city records -- I have seen it.
But probably the most immediate reason is MOB believes he has friends on the council. He contributed to their campaigns, directly and indirectly. Some have acknowledged this, some have not claimed his contribution or tried to hide it. He also invested personal time in their campaigns to be elected, and greeted them at a victory party.
Yes, the MOBster believes he has friends on the council - and why not? Have you heard any of the new members publicly state they stand against MOB and his agenda? No? Have any publicly said they will not tolerate his lies? Have you heard any of them state that Michael O'Bric and those that donated to his cause should reimburse the city for the cost of the independent investigation? No? Then ask yourself a simple question..... WHY NOT?
The mayor stated the independent investigation cost $25,000 -- that is not true. That only represents the portion of the bill by Barney Knight. To be accurate, it must include money spent with the two city attorneys, as well as time spent by city employees gathering information. My best guess is $40,000 to $60,000. This is a huge amount of taxpayer money just to provide a second investigation of the internal investigation which also found no merit to the allegations. Remember that internal investigation was directed and managed by the new council.
The time has come for the city council to "man up". The council was so relieved to walk away from this matter that they forgot a crucial part of the healing process. They must now speak up for their actions as individuals and not hide behind a group dynamic. They must state their relationship to MOB past, present, and future. If they don't, the MOBster will hang around and ask them for more time, unjustified injury, and money to be spent for his evil crusade.
The council spent thousands and thousands of our tax dollars on this wild goose chase, even after some ran on a platform to bring integrity and financial responsibility to city leadership. Since they are reluctant to be forth coming, I will do my part to help them find personal integrity. In my next blog I will layout how much money and funds each member of the council received, new and returning members, and how MOB was involved.
Friday, August 20, 2010
The Truth Means Trouble
The Truth means trouble.
On Tuesday night, Truth persevered. Again. Ah, the Truth. It's not as sexy or as exciting as Lies, but it's much more durable. It's definitely more defensible. It keeps good company, standing shoulder to shoulder with Faith and Justice. Lies can seem invincible with impressive wins for fame and fortune, but in the end, Truth usually comes out on top. And when it does, Truth means trouble.
First let's talk about Tuesday night. Before a packed house, special investigator Barney Knight presented his findings after a closed session by the City Council. With an initial statement, Barney announced the innocence of Yost Zachary. The room erupted in cheers and celebration.Barney expanded on his findings, but the results remained - innocent of allegations. Mayor Weber then read a thoughtful statement that was to represent the council as a whole. It was evident these were his words, and I believe they were heartfelt. Mayor Weber reiterated Yost's innocence, noted the admirable way Yost held up during the whole ordeal, noted the burden to his life and family, and expressed his belief that everything is complete and the city must now move forward. This was followed by each council member giving a short statement, followed by four citizen's being allowed time to express their feelings. With that, a collective sigh was breathed and the meeting adjourned.
It 's hard to describe if you weren't there, but the meeting had a flow and feeling all it's own. It was a feeling of accomplishment, of certain progress. For Yost, it was vindication, the release of a crushing weight. For those who supported Yost, it was the recognition of justice served. For those that advanced MOB's agenda of lies, it was a feeling of relief to walk away from a situation that had become untenable. Everyone had a reason to feel good. Banners waved, politicians politicized. What was not evident was the restraint exercised by folks like myself that understand what else this means. It means trouble.
I found the individual statements by each council member revealing. With no emotion, Mayor Pro-Tem Gil Lillard stated this was over and time to focus on the City Bar-B-Que. Councilman Jane Kitner is eager to focus on the Arboretum. Professor Garner stated that although he thought "where there was smoke there was fire", he is now finally convinced there is "no grand conspiracy". Mayor Weber along with Councilmen Baker, Giddings, and Scibielski offered thoughtful and compassionate reflections. More about that later.
Preparing for this post, I came upon the Waco Trib editorial dated Thursday August 19th. By the time I reached the end, I had an epiphany. It was this -- that the Truth would mean trouble.
Point of Reference -- Epiphany: a sudden intuitive perception or insight into the reality or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by some simple or commonplace experience or occurrence. Like reading the paper.
I agree with many of the thoughts voiced in the editorial, well at least in the first column. But as the editorial progressed, I was dumb founded by two glaring omissions. The first was this-- as the editors laid blame to O'Bric and those that carried his message, they never once acknowledged the damage done by the Trib. As professional wordsmiths, they fully understand how their story presentation can validate one viewpoint over another. From pre-election until halfway through the summer, the Trib was reckless in their representation of events. Numerous times they would reiterate MOB's allegations while giving no presentation of facts. They would print pictures of MOB and KOB smiling, Yost with a frown. In June I asked Trib reporter Erin Quinn why she never checked Mike's allegations for truth. She point blank told me that was not her job; that she simply reported what was alleged and it was up to readers to determine what was real. In a follow up conversation, I asked why her articles were weighted to MOB's perspective - she said no one else seemed interested in talking to her. I replied no one trusted her due to her bias presentations. Then as her articles became more equitable, Trib headlines screamed sensational bylines. Headlines are approved by managers, not by reporters, so this points to a selfish desire on the paper's part to serve their own interest over fidelity to the story.
Secondly, was the editorial statement that "we shouldn't judge those who demanded investigations too harshly. In the face of serious allegations, city leaders were right to order investigations, one internal, one independent - the last costing local taxpayers $25,000".
Excuse me for a second, I feel a little throw-up in my throat. There, that's better. This is nothing more than a self-serving statement to provide cover in a "sheepskin" of compassion.
Epiphany Revelation: A fundamental problem with leadership today is that they want the benefits of power without the burden of responsibility and accountability. Point in case, there never were serious allegations, only unfounded, wildly worded allegations by one man. NO PROOF WAS EVER OFFERED BY MIKE O'BRIC. NO PROOF WAS EVER UNCOVERED BY THE TRIB OR AN INTERNAL INVESTIGATION BY THE NEW COUNCIL. The new council is made up of a majority of new members, all that had the campaign support of MOB. How do you develop the logic that if this group, our new leaders, can't find any foundation for these allegations, that the citizens should pay for an additional independent investigation? That is precisely the kind of thing that fuels the Tea Party movement. Did you read the 40+ page report? Even investigator Barney Knight acknowledged how silly some of allegations are. So no, there never was any proof of serious allegations. And $25,000 is not the real price tag of this last investigation -- that only covers Barney Knight's fees. When you add in the cost of the city attorney fees plus time spent by staff members to collect data for the investigation, the price tag will more likely be between $40,000 -- $60,000. The Trib should and would know this if they took the time to verify statements made by others.
For the city to fully heal, we must ensure this situation is not repeatable, with MOB or the next deceiver that comes along. We must be diligent and examine all the reasons we got to this point. We must review the decision making process of our leadership, and have full disclosure of all the facts - costs, allegiance's, etc. We must know the extent of their MOB relationships and have public statements from them that they no longer adhere to his agenda. They must be scrutinized and held accountable for their actions. Our leaders should have no objection being held to the same standards we expect from our city employees. And that is why the Truth means trouble -- our civic leaders must be held accountable to the same standards they exact on others. When they weld power, it must be with the understanding that they too must justify their actions both ethically and financially. When they don't, then there must be a consequence. They can not be above reproach. Without accountability and it's personal ramifications, expect more power abuse in the name of personal agendas and "allegations".
And for our friends at the Trib, get out the Caster Oil. "Physician, heal thyself".
On Tuesday night, Truth persevered. Again. Ah, the Truth. It's not as sexy or as exciting as Lies, but it's much more durable. It's definitely more defensible. It keeps good company, standing shoulder to shoulder with Faith and Justice. Lies can seem invincible with impressive wins for fame and fortune, but in the end, Truth usually comes out on top. And when it does, Truth means trouble.
First let's talk about Tuesday night. Before a packed house, special investigator Barney Knight presented his findings after a closed session by the City Council. With an initial statement, Barney announced the innocence of Yost Zachary. The room erupted in cheers and celebration.Barney expanded on his findings, but the results remained - innocent of allegations. Mayor Weber then read a thoughtful statement that was to represent the council as a whole. It was evident these were his words, and I believe they were heartfelt. Mayor Weber reiterated Yost's innocence, noted the admirable way Yost held up during the whole ordeal, noted the burden to his life and family, and expressed his belief that everything is complete and the city must now move forward. This was followed by each council member giving a short statement, followed by four citizen's being allowed time to express their feelings. With that, a collective sigh was breathed and the meeting adjourned.
It 's hard to describe if you weren't there, but the meeting had a flow and feeling all it's own. It was a feeling of accomplishment, of certain progress. For Yost, it was vindication, the release of a crushing weight. For those who supported Yost, it was the recognition of justice served. For those that advanced MOB's agenda of lies, it was a feeling of relief to walk away from a situation that had become untenable. Everyone had a reason to feel good. Banners waved, politicians politicized. What was not evident was the restraint exercised by folks like myself that understand what else this means. It means trouble.
I found the individual statements by each council member revealing. With no emotion, Mayor Pro-Tem Gil Lillard stated this was over and time to focus on the City Bar-B-Que. Councilman Jane Kitner is eager to focus on the Arboretum. Professor Garner stated that although he thought "where there was smoke there was fire", he is now finally convinced there is "no grand conspiracy". Mayor Weber along with Councilmen Baker, Giddings, and Scibielski offered thoughtful and compassionate reflections. More about that later.
Preparing for this post, I came upon the Waco Trib editorial dated Thursday August 19th. By the time I reached the end, I had an epiphany. It was this -- that the Truth would mean trouble.
Point of Reference -- Epiphany: a sudden intuitive perception or insight into the reality or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by some simple or commonplace experience or occurrence. Like reading the paper.
I agree with many of the thoughts voiced in the editorial, well at least in the first column. But as the editorial progressed, I was dumb founded by two glaring omissions. The first was this-- as the editors laid blame to O'Bric and those that carried his message, they never once acknowledged the damage done by the Trib. As professional wordsmiths, they fully understand how their story presentation can validate one viewpoint over another. From pre-election until halfway through the summer, the Trib was reckless in their representation of events. Numerous times they would reiterate MOB's allegations while giving no presentation of facts. They would print pictures of MOB and KOB smiling, Yost with a frown. In June I asked Trib reporter Erin Quinn why she never checked Mike's allegations for truth. She point blank told me that was not her job; that she simply reported what was alleged and it was up to readers to determine what was real. In a follow up conversation, I asked why her articles were weighted to MOB's perspective - she said no one else seemed interested in talking to her. I replied no one trusted her due to her bias presentations. Then as her articles became more equitable, Trib headlines screamed sensational bylines. Headlines are approved by managers, not by reporters, so this points to a selfish desire on the paper's part to serve their own interest over fidelity to the story.
Secondly, was the editorial statement that "we shouldn't judge those who demanded investigations too harshly. In the face of serious allegations, city leaders were right to order investigations, one internal, one independent - the last costing local taxpayers $25,000".
Excuse me for a second, I feel a little throw-up in my throat. There, that's better. This is nothing more than a self-serving statement to provide cover in a "sheepskin" of compassion.
Epiphany Revelation: A fundamental problem with leadership today is that they want the benefits of power without the burden of responsibility and accountability. Point in case, there never were serious allegations, only unfounded, wildly worded allegations by one man. NO PROOF WAS EVER OFFERED BY MIKE O'BRIC. NO PROOF WAS EVER UNCOVERED BY THE TRIB OR AN INTERNAL INVESTIGATION BY THE NEW COUNCIL. The new council is made up of a majority of new members, all that had the campaign support of MOB. How do you develop the logic that if this group, our new leaders, can't find any foundation for these allegations, that the citizens should pay for an additional independent investigation? That is precisely the kind of thing that fuels the Tea Party movement. Did you read the 40+ page report? Even investigator Barney Knight acknowledged how silly some of allegations are. So no, there never was any proof of serious allegations. And $25,000 is not the real price tag of this last investigation -- that only covers Barney Knight's fees. When you add in the cost of the city attorney fees plus time spent by staff members to collect data for the investigation, the price tag will more likely be between $40,000 -- $60,000. The Trib should and would know this if they took the time to verify statements made by others.
For the city to fully heal, we must ensure this situation is not repeatable, with MOB or the next deceiver that comes along. We must be diligent and examine all the reasons we got to this point. We must review the decision making process of our leadership, and have full disclosure of all the facts - costs, allegiance's, etc. We must know the extent of their MOB relationships and have public statements from them that they no longer adhere to his agenda. They must be scrutinized and held accountable for their actions. Our leaders should have no objection being held to the same standards we expect from our city employees. And that is why the Truth means trouble -- our civic leaders must be held accountable to the same standards they exact on others. When they weld power, it must be with the understanding that they too must justify their actions both ethically and financially. When they don't, then there must be a consequence. They can not be above reproach. Without accountability and it's personal ramifications, expect more power abuse in the name of personal agendas and "allegations".
And for our friends at the Trib, get out the Caster Oil. "Physician, heal thyself".
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Investigation Culmination
Regardless of aim, the string has been freed, the bow's job done. The arrow of Justice has flown through multiple allegations and investigations, destined to strike on Tuesday. The impact of this event will culminate months of energy and effort, both good and bad. Per the city of Woodway website, a special meeting has been called for Tuesday August 17th @ 5:30pm. Here is the agenda as posted:
1. Invocation
2. Executive Session ( Closed to Public) Private review by Council of the results.
3. Open Session ( Open to Public) Public report of Investigation and action by Council responding to those results.
4. Public Comment Time
5. Close.
Point of Reference - The agenda states this investigation is a response to allegations made by a citizen ( singular).
I encourage everyone to attend, especially Mike O'Bric. He has labored for years to make this happen and convinced the city council to spend a huge sum of our tax dollars to satisfy his quest. He started it, he drove it. The council empowered it. This investigation is really for MOB and those that supported his agenda of lies. Now it's done, and the results are in.
The finish of this whole affair is in the hands of the seated City Council. Two new council members have now recorded in writing that their campaigns were funded by MOB. A third one has big questions about his funding, with indications it went through MOB's grass roots campaign organization. So, when presented with the results, we will find out what each council member is really made of.
Since they authorized a large expenditure of city funds for this legal investigation (after their own internal audit found no basis or merit to the allegations), I find it only right and fair that each councilman bring closure for citizens and make a summary statement. Citizens deserve to know and must hear:
1.Their individual feelings on Mike O'Bric's allegations.
2.If they each believe Yost is innocent in regards to the investigated allegations.
3.What they believe Yost is due at this point - a reprimand or apology.
4. Their personal statement of confidence in Yost.
5.What, if any, other investigations or plans concerning Yost do they plan to act on in the next year.
This meeting will set the framework for the immediate future of Yost, the sitting Council, the City of Woodway, city employees, and citizens. Pray for truth, root for justice. Accept nothing less.
The house will be packed, so come early. See you there.
1. Invocation
2. Executive Session ( Closed to Public) Private review by Council of the results.
3. Open Session ( Open to Public) Public report of Investigation and action by Council responding to those results.
4. Public Comment Time
5. Close.
Point of Reference - The agenda states this investigation is a response to allegations made by a citizen ( singular).
I encourage everyone to attend, especially Mike O'Bric. He has labored for years to make this happen and convinced the city council to spend a huge sum of our tax dollars to satisfy his quest. He started it, he drove it. The council empowered it. This investigation is really for MOB and those that supported his agenda of lies. Now it's done, and the results are in.
The finish of this whole affair is in the hands of the seated City Council. Two new council members have now recorded in writing that their campaigns were funded by MOB. A third one has big questions about his funding, with indications it went through MOB's grass roots campaign organization. So, when presented with the results, we will find out what each council member is really made of.
Since they authorized a large expenditure of city funds for this legal investigation (after their own internal audit found no basis or merit to the allegations), I find it only right and fair that each councilman bring closure for citizens and make a summary statement. Citizens deserve to know and must hear:
1.Their individual feelings on Mike O'Bric's allegations.
2.If they each believe Yost is innocent in regards to the investigated allegations.
3.What they believe Yost is due at this point - a reprimand or apology.
4. Their personal statement of confidence in Yost.
5.What, if any, other investigations or plans concerning Yost do they plan to act on in the next year.
This meeting will set the framework for the immediate future of Yost, the sitting Council, the City of Woodway, city employees, and citizens. Pray for truth, root for justice. Accept nothing less.
The house will be packed, so come early. See you there.
Sunday, August 8, 2010
What to Expect from MOB
The independent investigation of Yost Zakhary has been completed and the results due back in the next couple of weeks. As noted in my last blog, Mayor Weber said these results will first be reviewed by the council in closed session. Following the closed portion, the meeting will be opened to the public and the results detailed for citizens. Afterwards, a motion will be made and the council will vote. They can vote to accept the results, vote to reject the results, or make a motion altogether different. What they can't do is sit on the fence any longer. After this special meeting, each councilman will have placed on record, in one way or another, the following:
1. Whether or not they believe MOB allegations are truthful and have merit.
2. Whether City Manager Yost Zahkary committed any wrongful behavior or unlawful acts.
The results affect everyone involved - Yost, current council members, past council members,
citizens, and the O'Brics. So let's talk about the OBs.
Based on everything revealed to date, I believe there will be no big surprises and Yost's reputation will be restored. When that happens, what will MOB do?
If he makes the meeting, expect a defiant speech. He will cry foul, saying a conspiracy against the good citizens was carried out in the dark of night. He will wail how his "brave wife" has been humiliated and persecuted. He will stress how the REAL evidence was destroyed or manipulated by those loyal to Yost. He will talk of travesty. He will also tell everyone of the great personal toll this has taken on his health and that of Karen. In short, he will say and do all the things he has done in the past, accepting no responsibility for his damaging actions. If he doesn't make the meeting, expect the same rantings in letter form.
MOB is a creature of habit. If he can get press from the paper, he will rehash his conspiracy theory. If television news comes calling, expect him to hide once more. Then as the attention wains and the spotlight fades, expect the following -- MOB will begin to hunt for a new victim. He will look for some organization eager for "hands on" help, an organization with a good reputation that needs active participants. When he finds such a group, expect "the cycle" to begin all over.
If you see MOB surface in another group, take courage and ask that group if they know about Mike, really know about Mike. If they don't, do the right thing and share the truth.
1. Whether or not they believe MOB allegations are truthful and have merit.
2. Whether City Manager Yost Zahkary committed any wrongful behavior or unlawful acts.
The results affect everyone involved - Yost, current council members, past council members,
citizens, and the O'Brics. So let's talk about the OBs.
Based on everything revealed to date, I believe there will be no big surprises and Yost's reputation will be restored. When that happens, what will MOB do?
If he makes the meeting, expect a defiant speech. He will cry foul, saying a conspiracy against the good citizens was carried out in the dark of night. He will wail how his "brave wife" has been humiliated and persecuted. He will stress how the REAL evidence was destroyed or manipulated by those loyal to Yost. He will talk of travesty. He will also tell everyone of the great personal toll this has taken on his health and that of Karen. In short, he will say and do all the things he has done in the past, accepting no responsibility for his damaging actions. If he doesn't make the meeting, expect the same rantings in letter form.
MOB is a creature of habit. If he can get press from the paper, he will rehash his conspiracy theory. If television news comes calling, expect him to hide once more. Then as the attention wains and the spotlight fades, expect the following -- MOB will begin to hunt for a new victim. He will look for some organization eager for "hands on" help, an organization with a good reputation that needs active participants. When he finds such a group, expect "the cycle" to begin all over.
If you see MOB surface in another group, take courage and ask that group if they know about Mike, really know about Mike. If they don't, do the right thing and share the truth.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
The Deafening Silence
For weeks now, it's been growing. And now it's so loud, it practically drowns out everything else. Hear that -- or rather don't hear that? It's the overwhelming silence, the noise that is gone. What happened? Where did it go? Is it coming back?
"The Silence". Like a child maturing into a good adult, it is the product of caring people, family, and friends. It is the culmination of perseverance and dedication to noble principals that serve the greater good we call Woodway. The principals of self-sacrifice over self-service, of truth over slander. It represents the idea that right is might, that good things are worth fighting for.
So what has been silenced?
1. The lies of Micheal O'Bric. MOB, who has hurt more area people than he ever helped, has suddenly quit spewing his poison. He has prematurely ended his "victory lap" and disappeared. Edmund Burke once said " All that's necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." MOB was on his way to proving just that. Except out of these dark days good men AND WOMEN of Woodway decided to put a stop to his madness. They stood up in public, stood face to face with MOB, and challenged his allegations. They championed facts over fiction, truth over slander. Their courage became contagious. It led to interest by local television, the first media to really question MOB and ask for proof. Next thing you know, Saddam O'Bric not only jumped down his spider hole, but he and Karen called the Woodway Police and wanted charges against Channel 10 News for trespassing when they rang the doorbell and asked for an audience. MOB, the man in love with printed media when they were repeating his fabrications, demanded police protection from broadcast media when they put him under the microscope. Folks, some things you just can't make up.
2. The Support for MOB. Since May, those demanding justice have grown in numbers and voice. Conversely, those supporting the MOB agenda have strangely lost their voice. Maybe the mounting facts have become too much for them to bear. Maybe they've actually had a change of heart, feeling deceived themselves. No matter they are silent. Hey, what about the grass roots group that Mike claimed to be the leader of, Woodway Citizens Concerned For Good City Government? Remember, pre-election, how they were suppose to be afraid? Not afraid of supporting a man with no ethics in his quest to damage others, but oddly afraid to have their name mentioned for fear of retribution?
Well, their candidates not only won, but became the majority. And with that, suddenly there was no reason to hide. The candidates they supported control the council. So, where are they at city meetings -- who are they? Why haven't they come forward with pride at their accomplishment, proud of their association with MOB? Ollie, Ollie, Oxen, All In Free!
Mayor Weber announced last night that at the next appointed council meeting, he believes the final investigation will be complete and results presented to the council. After closed session, the council will then come out and the findings presented to the public. Then the council will have to vote publicly on a final response. Come early, it should be interesting. Please save a seat for Mike.
Next week - What to Expect From MOB
"The Silence". Like a child maturing into a good adult, it is the product of caring people, family, and friends. It is the culmination of perseverance and dedication to noble principals that serve the greater good we call Woodway. The principals of self-sacrifice over self-service, of truth over slander. It represents the idea that right is might, that good things are worth fighting for.
So what has been silenced?
1. The lies of Micheal O'Bric. MOB, who has hurt more area people than he ever helped, has suddenly quit spewing his poison. He has prematurely ended his "victory lap" and disappeared. Edmund Burke once said " All that's necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." MOB was on his way to proving just that. Except out of these dark days good men AND WOMEN of Woodway decided to put a stop to his madness. They stood up in public, stood face to face with MOB, and challenged his allegations. They championed facts over fiction, truth over slander. Their courage became contagious. It led to interest by local television, the first media to really question MOB and ask for proof. Next thing you know, Saddam O'Bric not only jumped down his spider hole, but he and Karen called the Woodway Police and wanted charges against Channel 10 News for trespassing when they rang the doorbell and asked for an audience. MOB, the man in love with printed media when they were repeating his fabrications, demanded police protection from broadcast media when they put him under the microscope. Folks, some things you just can't make up.
2. The Support for MOB. Since May, those demanding justice have grown in numbers and voice. Conversely, those supporting the MOB agenda have strangely lost their voice. Maybe the mounting facts have become too much for them to bear. Maybe they've actually had a change of heart, feeling deceived themselves. No matter they are silent. Hey, what about the grass roots group that Mike claimed to be the leader of, Woodway Citizens Concerned For Good City Government? Remember, pre-election, how they were suppose to be afraid? Not afraid of supporting a man with no ethics in his quest to damage others, but oddly afraid to have their name mentioned for fear of retribution?
Well, their candidates not only won, but became the majority. And with that, suddenly there was no reason to hide. The candidates they supported control the council. So, where are they at city meetings -- who are they? Why haven't they come forward with pride at their accomplishment, proud of their association with MOB? Ollie, Ollie, Oxen, All In Free!
Mayor Weber announced last night that at the next appointed council meeting, he believes the final investigation will be complete and results presented to the council. After closed session, the council will then come out and the findings presented to the public. Then the council will have to vote publicly on a final response. Come early, it should be interesting. Please save a seat for Mike.
Next week - What to Expect From MOB
Sunday, July 25, 2010
The myth of the "Big Mystery"
The "Big Mystery" .... it comes in variations. It was the fodder of election rally cries for Professor Chuck Garner, Dr. Paul Scibielski, and Mike O'Bric. Variations yes, but essentially it went like this: What right did the previous city council have to build a "duplicate" city hall, wasting millions of taxpayer dollars? Why did they do it without asking citizens for permission? Why the conspiracy to build a Woodway Taj Mahal? Why are they wasting $100,000s on utilities for this "duplicate" city hall?
Above are copies of the the front page of the Waco Tribune Neighbor Plus Section, dated January 6, 2008. That's right, 2008 -- two and a half years ago. Written by Trib community editor Ken Sury, it details the new city building and its' completion. It details what it is to be used for, what the older building would now become, and what services would stay in the existing Public Safety building. It tells how the project came in under budget, and notes $660,000 of the project cost went to drainage improvements and the new paved parking behind city hall. Anyone who has watched a child's game at the Family Center (prior to Jan 2008) knows what a wonderful improvement this is, not only for parking sake but for nighttime safety due to parking lot lights. This lot also serves as overflow parking for Arboretum events as well. The article spends time detailing upgrades to the family center, which the city took over from a nonprofit committee. Heck, even if you didn't read the article you couldn't miss the pictures. So let's debunk the myth of the "Big Mystery" which is the newest municipal building.
First, the City of Woodway has had a long term building plan in place for years --- as any well run city should have. The plan called for adding another building as our city population grew. Good organizations know it's bad management if you wait too long to solve such a need. That is why cities develop long range plans, why efficiently run cities implement those plans before reaching a crisis point. The plan was to move certain city functions into a new building, leaving other departments in the old building with room to grow. Mission accomplished. But we also recognized a growing need for parking at the recently acquired Family Center. I can't remember the exact number, but roughly 2.5 adults show up to watch each child play in WFC sports. We discovered not only do parents come, but grandparents support their families too. Secondly, the city was prudent in funding this project. Money was set aside. When the project was complete, the city owed----zero. Nothing. The building was paid for with cash. It has never been a financial burden to the citizens, never caused their taxes to be raised one penny. Does the city pay for utilities on this building? Sure, just as Waco or Hewitt will pay when they add infrastructure. Finally, as the Trib article so vividly demonstrates, there was nothing secretive about this project. To the contrary, we wanted everyone to know that Woodway was a well managed, progressive place to live.
So you see, for anyone who cared to know, the new municipal building (now Woodway City Hall) was not and is not a mystery. But if you like to discuss mysteries, here are a couple of interesting ones to kick around:
1. With postings in the city newsletter, discussion at city council meetings, and this full page article in the paper, why didn't anyone come forward to complain until over two years later?
( Remember MOB has been sending his letter of lies for years)2. Why weren't Dr Scibielski and Dr Garner paying attention to all this public information as this project went forward, starting three years ago?
3. If they really thought citizens had been wronged and duly cheated, why didn't Scibielski and Garner run for office when council seats came open in 2009? Heck, why didn't they just come forward as concerned citizens two years ago?
Truth is, no one was meaningfully concerned about the new building until MOB started his assassination campaign against city leaders and Yost Zachary. Since neither Garner nor Scibeilski show evidence of doing homework, offer proof of looking at city records, or served the city on any board that might have given them insight, I will opinion they didn't care until MOB told them to care. MOB surely pledged he would help them get elected if they did their part by promoting his claims. Sadly, they did and he did and truth was lost along the way.
Next Blog - The Deafening Silence.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Justice Required
"Then former Councilman Robert Humphrey came to ask whether the Council had acted to investigate the allegation he had presented at the June 14th meeting. City Attorney Mike Dixon assured Mr. Humphrey that indeed that allegation and other aspects of the situation had been investigated, and would be reported when possible. Note: If a lawsuit were not in progress, it may have been appropriate for the Council to request an investigation of the allegation. But as things stand, these issues are part of the City's defense of the case, and as such were investigated carefully well in advance of Mr. Humphrey's allegation."
These words, written by Councilman Chuck Garner, are posted on his blog. They are suppose to be an accurate portrayal of my exchange with the mayor/council at the last city meeting on July 12th. If your only source of information is Chuck's blog, you will probably come away with an understanding that is inaccurate and wrong. This is precisely the reason I called for the city to provide an internet format (live streaming would be best) of council meetings when I spoke at the second official meeting of the new council.
At the risk of confusing you a little, I need to talk about my addressing the council on June 14th. I had come before the council, at that meeting, with a concern of Karen O'Bric's denying the city required revenue fees from Arboretum rentals spanning a number of prior years. Highlighting just one customer, the uncollected fees would have resulted in revenue of over $2,500 - just one customer. Here's a quick point of reference --in my last term on the council, I served as liaison for the arboretum board to the city council. That position allowed me to develop a working understanding of that board and the fundamentals of how the arboretum functioned. Anyway, I told the council about information I had personally seen from the city arboretum records, and handed city secretary Jennifer Canniday a copy of this customer's correspondence that supported my concern. (Protocol is to hand any written information to the city secretary for her to disseminate to the council members). I ended my address by asking for the council to investigate KOB's practice's, reminding that she did not have the right to deny the city funding.
Within a couple of days after that meeting, Chuck made the following series of postings on his blog:
"Note: Two days after the meeting, all the Council members received a letter from Mr. O'Bric explaining that all large donors to the Arboretum are granted one free use of the facility each year. According to the letter, as a major donor ($13,843) to the Arboretum, Karen O'Bric was entitled to this and used it for the Baylor track team each of the past nine years. Set-up and cleanup were done at no expense to the City, which was not always the case with other "free" users of the facility. Apparently the current track team leadership did not realize that this free use of the facility had been a gift, and upon contacting the current Arboretum management, confusion on both sides apparently led to the accusation against Mrs. O'Bric."
"Note added 6/22: Before posting the note above, I verified with Yost Zakhary that large donors to the Arboretum are indeed granted one free rental each year. He did not know if Karen O'Bric was on the list of large donors."
"Note added 6/23: Yost Zakhary emailed me a clarification this afternoon - "The only large donors who receive a free rental each year are those who were the founders and made a large donation prior to 1998. Karen is not on that list of founders. If she made a large donation after that time, as others have, she was only entitled to a one time free rental."
What did his series of postings demonstrate? At best they demonstrate:
1. Chuck was happy to use information from the O'Brics as truth,
2. Chuck did not verify the accuracy of their information,
3. Chuck did not do any independent homework. There is a document, written by KOB herself, listing all the donors eligible for free space usage. Her name is not on that list. How is she magically on the list now?
4. Chuck has demonstrated the habit of asking others for a quick answer rather than looking for physical evidence. Well, except concerning Yost.
Flash forward now to the recent council meeting of July 12th. I addressed the council, and as formality dictates, stated my name and address. I then recounted how I had come before the council at a previous meeting (June 14th) with my concern of Karen O'Bric denying the city required fees from Arboretum rentals over a number of prior years. I then asked if any real investigation had been executed, and what the results were. Mayor Weber began by stating that he believed it had, but that he would not talk about the KOB case. As I respectfully responded to his comment, he deferred to the city legal counsel for confirmation. Mike Dixon, counsel for the city, gave a very careful response that indicated the city had reviewed certain KOB actions and would be looking into them further in the future (no specific detail). A little more guarded discussion, and then the Mayor asked if that answered my question. At this point I stated that KOB's situation demanded equity, and wanted to make sure the council would be treating this employee the same way they were treating employee Yost Zahkary. The mayor and at least one other council member verbally stated yes. I was also promised that all the information of that investigation would be made public.With those promises, I agreed that should be acceptable.
To keep council members as well as citizens clear, currently there are three different investigations/legal matters that should be in play. First, the investigation of Yost. I know the Mayor doesn't want it called an investigation, but my dad told me if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it's a duck. Secondly, there is the lawsuit by KOB against the city. Not the city against her, but her against the city. The city's position is a defensive one in that matter. And finally, there is my discovery of revenue denial by Karen as an employee. This must be investigated as well. This issue was not investigated well in advance of my disclosure. That is simply not true - I was on the council at that time and it was never mentioned or revealed. Plus there are different legal ramifications in this if KOB is shown to benefit from her actions in some way.
Want things to get even more convoluted? According to MOB, all the new council members received campaign funding from MOB himself. Any voting by such members on MOB/KOB issues become ethic violations.
The council is currently weighing out the merits of some type of internet coverage of council meetings. A lot of things for Woodway have changed with this past election, and the days of trust are gone or damaged. We as citizens need an independent, objective way to review how our elected officials work for us. We need to be able to judge for ourselves if they are acting with integrity, acting smartly, and acting in the city's best interest. If they were elected on promises made to citizen voters, then voters deserve a way to verify that those verbal contracts are being kept. Blogs, even mine, can be filtered. The newspaper certainly is. In this day and time, we need to see for ourselves, make our own judgement. We need internet confirmation - audio and video. If the current council worries about cost, remind them of the money wasted on the independent legal review to once again investigate the lying allegations of MOB. Remind them and demand the convenience of the internet.
Next blog -- the "Big Secret" myth exposed.
These words, written by Councilman Chuck Garner, are posted on his blog. They are suppose to be an accurate portrayal of my exchange with the mayor/council at the last city meeting on July 12th. If your only source of information is Chuck's blog, you will probably come away with an understanding that is inaccurate and wrong. This is precisely the reason I called for the city to provide an internet format (live streaming would be best) of council meetings when I spoke at the second official meeting of the new council.
At the risk of confusing you a little, I need to talk about my addressing the council on June 14th. I had come before the council, at that meeting, with a concern of Karen O'Bric's denying the city required revenue fees from Arboretum rentals spanning a number of prior years. Highlighting just one customer, the uncollected fees would have resulted in revenue of over $2,500 - just one customer. Here's a quick point of reference --in my last term on the council, I served as liaison for the arboretum board to the city council. That position allowed me to develop a working understanding of that board and the fundamentals of how the arboretum functioned. Anyway, I told the council about information I had personally seen from the city arboretum records, and handed city secretary Jennifer Canniday a copy of this customer's correspondence that supported my concern. (Protocol is to hand any written information to the city secretary for her to disseminate to the council members). I ended my address by asking for the council to investigate KOB's practice's, reminding that she did not have the right to deny the city funding.
Within a couple of days after that meeting, Chuck made the following series of postings on his blog:
"Note: Two days after the meeting, all the Council members received a letter from Mr. O'Bric explaining that all large donors to the Arboretum are granted one free use of the facility each year. According to the letter, as a major donor ($13,843) to the Arboretum, Karen O'Bric was entitled to this and used it for the Baylor track team each of the past nine years. Set-up and cleanup were done at no expense to the City, which was not always the case with other "free" users of the facility. Apparently the current track team leadership did not realize that this free use of the facility had been a gift, and upon contacting the current Arboretum management, confusion on both sides apparently led to the accusation against Mrs. O'Bric."
"Note added 6/22: Before posting the note above, I verified with Yost Zakhary that large donors to the Arboretum are indeed granted one free rental each year. He did not know if Karen O'Bric was on the list of large donors."
"Note added 6/23: Yost Zakhary emailed me a clarification this afternoon - "The only large donors who receive a free rental each year are those who were the founders and made a large donation prior to 1998. Karen is not on that list of founders. If she made a large donation after that time, as others have, she was only entitled to a one time free rental."
What did his series of postings demonstrate? At best they demonstrate:
1. Chuck was happy to use information from the O'Brics as truth,
2. Chuck did not verify the accuracy of their information,
3. Chuck did not do any independent homework. There is a document, written by KOB herself, listing all the donors eligible for free space usage. Her name is not on that list. How is she magically on the list now?
4. Chuck has demonstrated the habit of asking others for a quick answer rather than looking for physical evidence. Well, except concerning Yost.
Flash forward now to the recent council meeting of July 12th. I addressed the council, and as formality dictates, stated my name and address. I then recounted how I had come before the council at a previous meeting (June 14th) with my concern of Karen O'Bric denying the city required fees from Arboretum rentals over a number of prior years. I then asked if any real investigation had been executed, and what the results were. Mayor Weber began by stating that he believed it had, but that he would not talk about the KOB case. As I respectfully responded to his comment, he deferred to the city legal counsel for confirmation. Mike Dixon, counsel for the city, gave a very careful response that indicated the city had reviewed certain KOB actions and would be looking into them further in the future (no specific detail). A little more guarded discussion, and then the Mayor asked if that answered my question. At this point I stated that KOB's situation demanded equity, and wanted to make sure the council would be treating this employee the same way they were treating employee Yost Zahkary. The mayor and at least one other council member verbally stated yes. I was also promised that all the information of that investigation would be made public.With those promises, I agreed that should be acceptable.
To keep council members as well as citizens clear, currently there are three different investigations/legal matters that should be in play. First, the investigation of Yost. I know the Mayor doesn't want it called an investigation, but my dad told me if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it's a duck. Secondly, there is the lawsuit by KOB against the city. Not the city against her, but her against the city. The city's position is a defensive one in that matter. And finally, there is my discovery of revenue denial by Karen as an employee. This must be investigated as well. This issue was not investigated well in advance of my disclosure. That is simply not true - I was on the council at that time and it was never mentioned or revealed. Plus there are different legal ramifications in this if KOB is shown to benefit from her actions in some way.
Want things to get even more convoluted? According to MOB, all the new council members received campaign funding from MOB himself. Any voting by such members on MOB/KOB issues become ethic violations.
The council is currently weighing out the merits of some type of internet coverage of council meetings. A lot of things for Woodway have changed with this past election, and the days of trust are gone or damaged. We as citizens need an independent, objective way to review how our elected officials work for us. We need to be able to judge for ourselves if they are acting with integrity, acting smartly, and acting in the city's best interest. If they were elected on promises made to citizen voters, then voters deserve a way to verify that those verbal contracts are being kept. Blogs, even mine, can be filtered. The newspaper certainly is. In this day and time, we need to see for ourselves, make our own judgement. We need internet confirmation - audio and video. If the current council worries about cost, remind them of the money wasted on the independent legal review to once again investigate the lying allegations of MOB. Remind them and demand the convenience of the internet.
Next blog -- the "Big Secret" myth exposed.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
The Doctor's Dilemma
Dilemma is defined as a situation requiring a choice between equally undesirable alternatives. Recent developments in the City of Woodway find Councilman Dr. Paul Scibielski facing a dilemma. The developments:
First, during recent budget meetings the council recognized a shortfall in city revenue resulting in a deficit of over $290,000 when compared to the budget. Secondly, at the last open meeting, the Woodway City Council issued the following public statement--
"The multitude of various allegations raised against the City Manager/Police Chief led to an internal City review which found no basis for any of the matters as alleged." This was a response to Mike O'Bric's letters of lies and slander.
I have inserted (above) the Campaign Flyer for Dr Paul, stating his promises and beliefs for/about the City of Woodway. Please click on the picture to enlarge it. In case the quality of the picture makes it hard to read, here are the major items:
"A Dedicated Advocate for Our Citizens"
" I am running on behalf of the citizens of Woodway to bring leadership and integrity to our city government...to make Woodway as great and effective as it should be.I am running to demand financial responsibility from our City Council...I will not be a "rubber stamp".
"No more wasting our tax dollars on:
a $2 million second city hall; $100,000's every year to operate 2 city halls;
$500,000 every year for extra city management;
$250,000 every year to replace city & police vehicles; just to name a few."
"No more increasing the taxes we pay every year....25% OVER 10 YEARS:
while the streets continue to deteriorate; the little work done is of poor quality; water and sewer lines aren't replaced; sewer rates are raised; and our water bills are going up".
"Dr. Paul Scibielski...a much needed advocate on our City Council"
Dr Paul's dilemma is simply this - stay with the lies, and with the way things are going, be labeled untruthful and risk his community reputation long term. Or come out now with the truth, confirm the previous lies, the involvement with Mike O'Bric, and face criticism now. Remember part of the definition of a dilemma is that neither choice is desirable. Because of that, Dr. Paul has been trying a third strategy --avoiding the public. He is hoping everyone will forget his campaign and association with MOB. He has evaded responsibility for his words, happy to take a leadership role without accepting accountability for his promises.
At the second council meeting I asked all the new members a series of questions, asking them to acknowledge by raising their hands. I asked if any had toured our city facilities (buildings, pumping stations, property, etc) pre-election. None acknowledged yes. I asked if they had visited with city staff to get their opinion about the state of city affairs. None had. I asked how many had reviewed the city budget or financial statement with the city controller. None had. I asked how many had help in their campaigns from MOB - again no one acknowledged yes. I have to confess before asking the new council members, I had posed these same questions (minus the last one) to city staff in different departments and knew what the truth was.
MOB has stated in the newspaper he donated to Dr Paul's campaign financially. He also helped with signs and even helped recruit Dr. Paul to run. So ask yourself, how would Dr. Paul know if there are (2) city halls (as in duplicates) if he never toured the facilities? How could he know that the "duplicate city halls" waste $100,000's in operation costs if he never looked at a financial statement, much less a utility bill? The truth is HE NEVER INVESTIGATED ANY OF THESE THINGS. I believe Dr Paul didn't even have enough knowledge to write the lies in his campaign flyer. Sadly, if you compare his flyer to previous MOB letters, the evidence shows he allowed MOB to write it. MOB's words that were accepted by Dr Paul as his own. The grand irony in this is Dr. Paul, with his fiery rhetoric promising he will not be a "rubber stamp", became just that -- he became MOB's rubber stamp.
Back to the dilemma- the truth is coming out. The previous council members understand MOB fabricated all the lies about our city facilities. The independent accounting firm that annually reviewed city statements found no irregularities. The new council's own internal review didn't find any truth to the allegations. And now the city is WASTING taxpayer money to confirm what has already been confirmed. (Remember Paul's promise to STOP wasting taxpayer money).
If Dr. Paul is ready to redeem himself with the public, he needs to come clean now. Not later, but now - before it's too late. He must admit the truth. He must fully expose his relationship with MOB. Lastly, he needs to apologize. Not with a bunch of qualifications or conditional statements, but a meaningful, sincere apology.
Or don't. Don't and wait for the independent audit to come out. Wait for a third confirmation that MOB lied to everyone. Wait for final confirmation that his campaign statements about the city are lies. Then see how understanding people are with his ethics.
To be fair to Dr Paul, there is one last option if he does hold real proof of a duplicate city hall, $100,000s in wasted operation costs, and wasted money on "silly" things like replacing police vehicles. He must immediately force the shut down of the duplicate city hall, stop the associated wasteful operational costs, and get rid of all "extra city management". He must stop replacement of aging police vehicles. Remember the budget deficit, currently at a negative $290,000? Take all that "wasteful money" and bring our city budget back positive. Dr. Paul, here's the opportunity to follow through on your promises and be the"dedicated advocate for our citizens".
Just don't forget --- the truth is coming, with or without you.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Happy 4th
Dear Friends,
I am enjoying the holiday and wanted to leave a note that my next posting will be next weekend. Have a safe and wonderful holiday.
I am enjoying the holiday and wanted to leave a note that my next posting will be next weekend. Have a safe and wonderful holiday.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Detour #3 - Surprise x 3
You're probably going to be surprised by my post -- I am.
Two good things happened at the council meeting last night. First, Mayor Weber moved beyond the posted closed agenda and allowed citizens to speak. This simple but meaningful gesture shows respect for good citizens willing to take the time to be involved in our city. Interestingly, a reciprocal benefit of showing respect is that it is often returned by those of good intention. A small act, but key none the less.
More importantly, the council returned from closed session with a plan to resolve the OB allegations. Please don't be misled -- I still believe the city should never have reached the point of acting on MOB's wild accusations without him providing concrete proof. This will be an expensive lesson the city did not need to learn, one citizens did not need to pay for. I'm not just talking about money -- the price paid includes lost time, hurt feelings, lost trust. I also believe a couple of the new council members, who have yet to acknowledge their shared responsibility of pushing the city into this position, will have to answer for their actions before it's all over. But last night, the council as a whole moved forward. The surprising part? The first public acknowledgement by the unified council on this matter . Here is a part of their prepared statement:
"The multitude of various allegations raised against the City Manager/Police Chief led to an internal City review which found no basis for any of the matters as alleged."
Even as they move forward with a legal review, the council, both old and new members, now acknowledge as one the allegations have no foundation. Translation--- all members now believe MOB's allegations are based on lies.
So now let me return with surprises of my own. First, thank you city council. Thank you for recognizing the truth, thank you for having the courage to acknowledge it out loud. Secondly, let me tell the council you were wrongly portrayed by the newspaper article headline this morning.
Last night I witnessed coverage of the meeting by Eli Ross and Channel 10. His reporting was even handed, accurately revealing the statements made by Mayor Weber. Channel 10 truly seems sincere in getting all sides of a story and avoids unfounded commentary and distortion of facts. Thank you Channel 10 for due diligence. To Channel 25, I'm sorry I did not see your story. I really need to learn to work the DVR. Thank you for taking an interest in Woodway.
Then this morning I read the front page article by Erin Quinn.
The article headline gave a different impression compared to what actually happened. Erin once again seemed to show MOB some credibility. Hey sizzle, conflict, scandal-- I get it. It sells. But accuracy is important if you want to be considered a top tier news source. Food for thought. I do sincerely thank the Waco Trib for considering Woodway an important part of the greater McLennan County community.
Anyway, thank you council for moving forward. And thank you again for acknowledging truth.
Back on track next post.
Two good things happened at the council meeting last night. First, Mayor Weber moved beyond the posted closed agenda and allowed citizens to speak. This simple but meaningful gesture shows respect for good citizens willing to take the time to be involved in our city. Interestingly, a reciprocal benefit of showing respect is that it is often returned by those of good intention. A small act, but key none the less.
More importantly, the council returned from closed session with a plan to resolve the OB allegations. Please don't be misled -- I still believe the city should never have reached the point of acting on MOB's wild accusations without him providing concrete proof. This will be an expensive lesson the city did not need to learn, one citizens did not need to pay for. I'm not just talking about money -- the price paid includes lost time, hurt feelings, lost trust. I also believe a couple of the new council members, who have yet to acknowledge their shared responsibility of pushing the city into this position, will have to answer for their actions before it's all over. But last night, the council as a whole moved forward. The surprising part? The first public acknowledgement by the unified council on this matter . Here is a part of their prepared statement:
"The multitude of various allegations raised against the City Manager/Police Chief led to an internal City review which found no basis for any of the matters as alleged."
Even as they move forward with a legal review, the council, both old and new members, now acknowledge as one the allegations have no foundation. Translation--- all members now believe MOB's allegations are based on lies.
So now let me return with surprises of my own. First, thank you city council. Thank you for recognizing the truth, thank you for having the courage to acknowledge it out loud. Secondly, let me tell the council you were wrongly portrayed by the newspaper article headline this morning.
Last night I witnessed coverage of the meeting by Eli Ross and Channel 10. His reporting was even handed, accurately revealing the statements made by Mayor Weber. Channel 10 truly seems sincere in getting all sides of a story and avoids unfounded commentary and distortion of facts. Thank you Channel 10 for due diligence. To Channel 25, I'm sorry I did not see your story. I really need to learn to work the DVR. Thank you for taking an interest in Woodway.
Then this morning I read the front page article by Erin Quinn.
The article headline gave a different impression compared to what actually happened. Erin once again seemed to show MOB some credibility. Hey sizzle, conflict, scandal-- I get it. It sells. But accuracy is important if you want to be considered a top tier news source. Food for thought. I do sincerely thank the Waco Trib for considering Woodway an important part of the greater McLennan County community.
Anyway, thank you council for moving forward. And thank you again for acknowledging truth.
Back on track next post.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
What Needs to Happen Next
Tomorrow, Monday June 28th, the mayor has called a special city council meeting, a closed session. This will be the 3rd executive session in 4 council meetings. According to the posted agenda, there will be:
"1. A closed meeting will be held pursuant to Section 551.074 of the Government Code (V.C.T.A.) so that the City Council may deliberate the employment, evaluation, duties, discipline or dismissal of, or complaints/grievances regarding, a City officer or employee and Section 551.071 of the Government Code (V.C.T.A.) so that the City Council can seek and receive legal advice from its attorneys regarding pending or threatened litigation, settlement offers, claims, or other matters for which the attorneys� duties to their client under the Texas State Bar Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct conflicts with the Open Meetings Act (Ch.551, Gov. Code), including, but not limited to: allegations against City Manager made by a citizen.
2.Discussion and consider action regarding retention of outside counsel to consult with the City Council and review allegations against City Manager/Police Chief."
The mayor is not allowing any open time for citizens to comment - on this matter or any other. At the last meeting visitors were put last on the agenda and made to wait; this meeting no visitor comments will be allowed. Mayor Bill Weber missed the first council meeting and did not show up for the Banquet held last week to recognize the good people that serve on Woodway's Boards and Commissions. From a man whose campaign flyer promised an engaged leader, his actions say something different.
So, what needs to happen at this point? What do the councilmen and the city council as a whole need to do to restore trust and the idea that they serve the city and all citizens?
Concerning the New Council Members:
They ran for office and won. They wanted leadership positions and voted two of their own to mayor and mayor pro-tem, in spite of a lack of experience. They have had almost two months to get up to speed. The " be patient with me I've never done this before" card has expired. Time to conduct the city's business with integrity and efficiency.
More importantly, they owe the citizens of Woodway honesty. They owe citizens the truth about their campaign contributions and they owe the truth about their relationship with MOB.
They will be voting on how to proceed with the allegations against Yost Zakhary yet they themselves have not filed all their campaign funding reports. As of last week, Gil Lillard had yet to file anything. Gil is the same man that announced ( at the last council meeting) that he was not a politician, but a statesman.
You might ask, "Why is this important?" It's important because according to MOB, Dr Scibielski and Dr. Garner took campaign funds from him. It is known Mayor Weber took campaign help from MOB. Although Mr. Lillard has waffled on his "knowledge" of MOB's involvement in his campaign, he has admitted to a strategy session with MOB and the other new members (pre-election). It's important because it is unethical for any office holder to vote on matters where they have received favor or have an influenced relationship with any of the concerned parties. They can't take money from MOB and then pretend to vote from an unbiased position on allegations he has made. And this extends to matters about his wife. Any man that received favor from MOB must abstain from any voting concerning Karen's court case. That is the correct and ethical thing to do. Said another way, if they vote on these matters, given their history, then they prove unethical. Giving back money now won't square the deal - they simply must abstain.
Concerning the existing Council Members:
The existing council has a responsibility to the citizens as well - they must be honest. Any allegation they know to be a lie or false, they must speak out against it. If they know an allegation to be true, they must expose it. They must vote the truth regardless of it's affect on their popularity with either citizens or other council members. The citizens of Woodway, those for and against Yost, deserve the truth.
Concerning the Council as a Whole:
They must put aside personal agendas and take care of all the citizens. They must honor their oath of office and not their egos. They must represent the city of Woodway with honesty, dignity, and integrity. They must be humble enough to openly admit when they make a mistake, apologize and learn from it. They must openly support the city staff and volunteers. Each councilman must remember his vote is no more important than other member's, his position no higher than that of citizen. They must be frugal with the citizen's money. They must not show favoritism for any one group of citizens, but treat all equally. Finally, they must put themselves last - they are servants of the city. Do these things, and they will preserve the wonderful place we call Woodway.
Next Blog..The Doctor's Dilemma
"1. A closed meeting will be held pursuant to Section 551.074 of the Government Code (V.C.T.A.) so that the City Council may deliberate the employment, evaluation, duties, discipline or dismissal of, or complaints/grievances regarding, a City officer or employee and Section 551.071 of the Government Code (V.C.T.A.) so that the City Council can seek and receive legal advice from its attorneys regarding pending or threatened litigation, settlement offers, claims, or other matters for which the attorneys� duties to their client under the Texas State Bar Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct conflicts with the Open Meetings Act (Ch.551, Gov. Code), including, but not limited to: allegations against City Manager made by a citizen.
2.Discussion and consider action regarding retention of outside counsel to consult with the City Council and review allegations against City Manager/Police Chief."
The mayor is not allowing any open time for citizens to comment - on this matter or any other. At the last meeting visitors were put last on the agenda and made to wait; this meeting no visitor comments will be allowed. Mayor Bill Weber missed the first council meeting and did not show up for the Banquet held last week to recognize the good people that serve on Woodway's Boards and Commissions. From a man whose campaign flyer promised an engaged leader, his actions say something different.
So, what needs to happen at this point? What do the councilmen and the city council as a whole need to do to restore trust and the idea that they serve the city and all citizens?
Concerning the New Council Members:
They ran for office and won. They wanted leadership positions and voted two of their own to mayor and mayor pro-tem, in spite of a lack of experience. They have had almost two months to get up to speed. The " be patient with me I've never done this before" card has expired. Time to conduct the city's business with integrity and efficiency.
More importantly, they owe the citizens of Woodway honesty. They owe citizens the truth about their campaign contributions and they owe the truth about their relationship with MOB.
They will be voting on how to proceed with the allegations against Yost Zakhary yet they themselves have not filed all their campaign funding reports. As of last week, Gil Lillard had yet to file anything. Gil is the same man that announced ( at the last council meeting) that he was not a politician, but a statesman.
You might ask, "Why is this important?" It's important because according to MOB, Dr Scibielski and Dr. Garner took campaign funds from him. It is known Mayor Weber took campaign help from MOB. Although Mr. Lillard has waffled on his "knowledge" of MOB's involvement in his campaign, he has admitted to a strategy session with MOB and the other new members (pre-election). It's important because it is unethical for any office holder to vote on matters where they have received favor or have an influenced relationship with any of the concerned parties. They can't take money from MOB and then pretend to vote from an unbiased position on allegations he has made. And this extends to matters about his wife. Any man that received favor from MOB must abstain from any voting concerning Karen's court case. That is the correct and ethical thing to do. Said another way, if they vote on these matters, given their history, then they prove unethical. Giving back money now won't square the deal - they simply must abstain.
Concerning the existing Council Members:
The existing council has a responsibility to the citizens as well - they must be honest. Any allegation they know to be a lie or false, they must speak out against it. If they know an allegation to be true, they must expose it. They must vote the truth regardless of it's affect on their popularity with either citizens or other council members. The citizens of Woodway, those for and against Yost, deserve the truth.
Concerning the Council as a Whole:
They must put aside personal agendas and take care of all the citizens. They must honor their oath of office and not their egos. They must represent the city of Woodway with honesty, dignity, and integrity. They must be humble enough to openly admit when they make a mistake, apologize and learn from it. They must openly support the city staff and volunteers. Each councilman must remember his vote is no more important than other member's, his position no higher than that of citizen. They must be frugal with the citizen's money. They must not show favoritism for any one group of citizens, but treat all equally. Finally, they must put themselves last - they are servants of the city. Do these things, and they will preserve the wonderful place we call Woodway.
Next Blog..The Doctor's Dilemma
Sunday, June 20, 2010
The Real OBs
The real OBs. We've all seen the letters. We've all heard the lies. We've all seen the self promotion. Who are they really - what kind of people are they?
I described the OB "Cycle" in my 5/23 post - how they enter an organization, volunteering and working hard, gaining a position with responsibility. Then their attacks begin on any who oppose their goal of ultimate power. I've described two other local organizations they have run " the Cycle" on -- Baylor's Track Program, and the Marine Corp League. Let me offer a little more information on each.
With Baylor, MOB volunteered to help. He was described as helpful, and in return was asked to help with track events. What you may not know is why the OBs chose the track program. It was because one of their closest family members was a track athlete for Baylor during this time. Unfortunately, MOB wanted to start telling and demanding things from the paid professionals at Baylor. By example, MOB demanded a key to the stadium so he could come and go at will, and wanted a mailbox at the stadium with his name on it. It went on from there, and Baylor's track program had no choice but to severe the relationship with MOB. By the way, letters were written - surprised?
At Baylor, MOB was sent off. The Marine Corps League situation ended in a stronger reprimand. Do your homework and discover that the Marines had their veteran's organization federally chartered in 1923. This organization is the Marine Corps League, and they are represented at the national, state, and local level. Their website states they are over 76,000 members strong. Besides the good work they do with Marine Veterans, they also have programs to teach youth values of "honesty, courage, and respect" . After arriving in Waco from California, MOB sought out and joined the local chapter. He became Adjunct Paymaster ( the equivalent of a Treasurer ) then began "the cycle". Two honorable men stood in his way - Commandant Ken Bates and Joe Martinez. MOB began writing letters to everyone in the organization with lies about these men. He also describes himself as the only honest, self sacrificing individual. I have seen the letters, and the slander goes on, but here is the important part. The Marine Corps League investigated, called MOB to a hearing, which I am told he refused to attend. In the end, the Marine Corps League expelled MOB from the organization for his actions. Since MOB is always promoting his past accomplishments as a marine, this is a telling piece he leaves out of his resume.
So, what happened to MOB, why did he suddenly change when arriving in Waco? The answer is he didn't - he came with habits intact. On a website for a military prep school, MOB lists among his accomplishments that he was a school district superintendent. According to the LA Times, that's not quite true. In one of his California employments, MOB became an assistant superintendent in the Bellflower Unified School District ( Los Angeles area). An August 13, 1978 article notes MOB as a subject of controversy among trustees ( school board members) and the community. The controversy revolved around his performance and self promotion to a higher paying job classification. An article written one month later describes MOB as a man of questioned credentials, and notes he came from the Fountain Valley United School District. At Fountain Valley as well, MOB was a point of controversy due to questionable credentials. By 1979, the LA Times writes that five key administrators left the Bellflower District, with only one administrator left --- MOB, assistant superintendent for planning and operations. Several former employees complain of overwork and dissatisfaction with the administration. This real life example shows the damage done when MOB gets the power he craves.
MOB is a man of controversy where ever he goes. One more piece of his past from California makes this even more interesting. The Jan 1978 article notes that the man in question was originally named Micheal Brick and that he changed his name to Micheal O'Bric during this time frame. In California, my understanding is that there are two main reasons men change their name - to seek a career in Hollywood, or to run from something in their past. Did MOB ever tell any of his candidates about his past? Did they ask before embracing his agenda? I don't know, but the implications are scary.
Allow me to reflect about KOB. I have said that MOB and KOB are inseparable. What one is involved in, so is the other. At the first council meeting MOB spoke on record and said he had nothing to do with KOBs lawsuit. That is a lie. MOB personally sent me two letters last year when I was on council, letters from the attorney representing KOB. The letters contain his name as well as hers. Once again, MOB is caught in a lie. Secondly, at the third council meeting I disclosed a problem I discovered concerning KOB denying revenue to the city of Woodway. I pointed the direction and told the new council it needed to be investigated. Two days later Councilman Garner had announced on his blog site that the OBs explained it away.
This says many things. For starters, Chuck is now conducting city business through his blog.He obviously is not worried about the ethical implications of this action as a city representative. With the overwhelming tide of facts to the contrary, Chuck did not look at city records, he simply turned once again to Bricopedia for his information. I have a written document, sent by KOB last year, listing all the Arboretum donors eligible for free rentals. KOB is not on that list, a list that came from her. A list that I believe will be confirmed as truth. Chuck is demonstrating a double standard - put Yost under the microscope, but accept the OBs version of the "truth" without investigation. Sadly, Chuck's actions suggest he is still eager to please the OBs or repay their help in his election. I still hold out hope that the remaining council members will look into how KOB cut unapproved "special deals" with groups like the unofficial track booster club.
One note of clarification. I find anyone that got a "deal" from KOB innocent. They simply took advantage of a great offer, something any group would do. KOB on the other hand, should never have bent the rules - not as a city employee. The irony is that the couple crying foul of everyone elses actions are the actual abusers.
So here are the real OBs. Verifiable. Next blog - What Needs to Happen Next.
I described the OB "Cycle" in my 5/23 post - how they enter an organization, volunteering and working hard, gaining a position with responsibility. Then their attacks begin on any who oppose their goal of ultimate power. I've described two other local organizations they have run " the Cycle" on -- Baylor's Track Program, and the Marine Corp League. Let me offer a little more information on each.
With Baylor, MOB volunteered to help. He was described as helpful, and in return was asked to help with track events. What you may not know is why the OBs chose the track program. It was because one of their closest family members was a track athlete for Baylor during this time. Unfortunately, MOB wanted to start telling and demanding things from the paid professionals at Baylor. By example, MOB demanded a key to the stadium so he could come and go at will, and wanted a mailbox at the stadium with his name on it. It went on from there, and Baylor's track program had no choice but to severe the relationship with MOB. By the way, letters were written - surprised?
At Baylor, MOB was sent off. The Marine Corps League situation ended in a stronger reprimand. Do your homework and discover that the Marines had their veteran's organization federally chartered in 1923. This organization is the Marine Corps League, and they are represented at the national, state, and local level. Their website states they are over 76,000 members strong. Besides the good work they do with Marine Veterans, they also have programs to teach youth values of "honesty, courage, and respect" . After arriving in Waco from California, MOB sought out and joined the local chapter. He became Adjunct Paymaster ( the equivalent of a Treasurer ) then began "the cycle". Two honorable men stood in his way - Commandant Ken Bates and Joe Martinez. MOB began writing letters to everyone in the organization with lies about these men. He also describes himself as the only honest, self sacrificing individual. I have seen the letters, and the slander goes on, but here is the important part. The Marine Corps League investigated, called MOB to a hearing, which I am told he refused to attend. In the end, the Marine Corps League expelled MOB from the organization for his actions. Since MOB is always promoting his past accomplishments as a marine, this is a telling piece he leaves out of his resume.
So, what happened to MOB, why did he suddenly change when arriving in Waco? The answer is he didn't - he came with habits intact. On a website for a military prep school, MOB lists among his accomplishments that he was a school district superintendent. According to the LA Times, that's not quite true. In one of his California employments, MOB became an assistant superintendent in the Bellflower Unified School District ( Los Angeles area). An August 13, 1978 article notes MOB as a subject of controversy among trustees ( school board members) and the community. The controversy revolved around his performance and self promotion to a higher paying job classification. An article written one month later describes MOB as a man of questioned credentials, and notes he came from the Fountain Valley United School District. At Fountain Valley as well, MOB was a point of controversy due to questionable credentials. By 1979, the LA Times writes that five key administrators left the Bellflower District, with only one administrator left --- MOB, assistant superintendent for planning and operations. Several former employees complain of overwork and dissatisfaction with the administration. This real life example shows the damage done when MOB gets the power he craves.
MOB is a man of controversy where ever he goes. One more piece of his past from California makes this even more interesting. The Jan 1978 article notes that the man in question was originally named Micheal Brick and that he changed his name to Micheal O'Bric during this time frame. In California, my understanding is that there are two main reasons men change their name - to seek a career in Hollywood, or to run from something in their past. Did MOB ever tell any of his candidates about his past? Did they ask before embracing his agenda? I don't know, but the implications are scary.
Allow me to reflect about KOB. I have said that MOB and KOB are inseparable. What one is involved in, so is the other. At the first council meeting MOB spoke on record and said he had nothing to do with KOBs lawsuit. That is a lie. MOB personally sent me two letters last year when I was on council, letters from the attorney representing KOB. The letters contain his name as well as hers. Once again, MOB is caught in a lie. Secondly, at the third council meeting I disclosed a problem I discovered concerning KOB denying revenue to the city of Woodway. I pointed the direction and told the new council it needed to be investigated. Two days later Councilman Garner had announced on his blog site that the OBs explained it away.
This says many things. For starters, Chuck is now conducting city business through his blog.He obviously is not worried about the ethical implications of this action as a city representative. With the overwhelming tide of facts to the contrary, Chuck did not look at city records, he simply turned once again to Bricopedia for his information. I have a written document, sent by KOB last year, listing all the Arboretum donors eligible for free rentals. KOB is not on that list, a list that came from her. A list that I believe will be confirmed as truth. Chuck is demonstrating a double standard - put Yost under the microscope, but accept the OBs version of the "truth" without investigation. Sadly, Chuck's actions suggest he is still eager to please the OBs or repay their help in his election. I still hold out hope that the remaining council members will look into how KOB cut unapproved "special deals" with groups like the unofficial track booster club.
One note of clarification. I find anyone that got a "deal" from KOB innocent. They simply took advantage of a great offer, something any group would do. KOB on the other hand, should never have bent the rules - not as a city employee. The irony is that the couple crying foul of everyone elses actions are the actual abusers.
So here are the real OBs. Verifiable. Next blog - What Needs to Happen Next.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Detour # 2
Tonight will be the third council meeting. I will post my entry "the Real OBs" next entry. I want to take a moment and share some observations and comments.
The Waco Trib printed an article about Woodway blogs this past Saturday. Two items discussed in my interview, but not in the article, were the value of blogging (not subject matter) and allowing comments to be posted.
Speaking to Erin Quinn at the Trib, I emphasized that blogging allowed me to have my voice heard "unfiltered". By that I mean no editing by others or interpretation by third party analysts before becoming public. The words in this blog, like them or not, are my words and deliver a complete message.
Concerning blog comments, I elected not to allow them for similar reasons. Commenting works great on do-it-yourself websites, but prove problematic on any other type of internet report. Erin acknowledged the Trib quit allowing comments to their website articles. Mr. Garner reviews his comments and only allows certain ones - he has pulled some off or disallowed them on his blog. As a blogger, it is too tempting to keep the ones you like and remove those you don't. For readers, it's too easy for some to portray themselves anonymously and have no responsibility for their comments or worse portray themselves as many different individuals. In the end, a comment section becomes subjective and not an accurate portrayal of your readership. I'm comfortable the Trib came to similar conclusions.
Not wanting to fall into that trap, I have left my blog in simple format without comments. I trust you the reader to decide for yourselves in an honest environment without the filtered influence of others.
Next blog will be back on task - the Real OBs.
The Waco Trib printed an article about Woodway blogs this past Saturday. Two items discussed in my interview, but not in the article, were the value of blogging (not subject matter) and allowing comments to be posted.
Speaking to Erin Quinn at the Trib, I emphasized that blogging allowed me to have my voice heard "unfiltered". By that I mean no editing by others or interpretation by third party analysts before becoming public. The words in this blog, like them or not, are my words and deliver a complete message.
Concerning blog comments, I elected not to allow them for similar reasons. Commenting works great on do-it-yourself websites, but prove problematic on any other type of internet report. Erin acknowledged the Trib quit allowing comments to their website articles. Mr. Garner reviews his comments and only allows certain ones - he has pulled some off or disallowed them on his blog. As a blogger, it is too tempting to keep the ones you like and remove those you don't. For readers, it's too easy for some to portray themselves anonymously and have no responsibility for their comments or worse portray themselves as many different individuals. In the end, a comment section becomes subjective and not an accurate portrayal of your readership. I'm comfortable the Trib came to similar conclusions.
Not wanting to fall into that trap, I have left my blog in simple format without comments. I trust you the reader to decide for yourselves in an honest environment without the filtered influence of others.
Next blog will be back on task - the Real OBs.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
2nd Council Meeting
Serving the citizens of Woodway was a privilege and pleasure. City employees were great to work with, making the rest of us look good. They were professional, they were courteous; above all they were efficient. The volunteers and elected officials I served with were of high integrity and shared a common goal of meeting the needs of greater Woodway. We always treated visitors to council meetings with dignity and respect. Together as a team, we quietly took care of Woodway business and continued the legacy of our wonderful community. I have been a part of a number of community efforts, but this ranks as the most satisfying.
Looking back, I have two regrets. One - while we were great stewards, we were lousy politicians. I say that because in retrospect, we did not do the one thing all politicians do - brag on their accomplishments and abilities. I believed balancing the budget, holding tax rates, increasing spending on road repair, developing high construction standards, promoting quality commercial development, and standing with citizens when Oncor started cutting trees, that all these things would be noticed and appreciated by citizens. The incumbent backlash on election day said otherwise. My second regret was that instead of standing up to MOBs slander, lies, and wild allegations, we did nothing. At the time, I felt that "turning the other cheek" was the best course of action. I felt engaging him would serve to validate his hate and encourage him to continue. Unfortunately, reality was just the opposite. MOBs onslaught of letters, in the absence of a response, became "self validating" in many citizen's eyes.
I can't correct my first regret, of not being a savvy politician. Quiet frankly, I don't think I would if I could. It's not how I'm wired; it's not my value system. But the second regret, standing up to the city liar and deceiver, that's different. Both MOB and KOB have a history of hurting good people, and with the help of the new council members, are posed to hurt more.
My commitment is now to my family, to neighbors, to citizens of Woodway, and strangely to MOB. At the first council meeting, Mike O'Bric asked for "sins to be exposed and corrected". That is what I plan to do -- expose the OBs for who they really are, expose the OB Party and it's true agenda, and expose any politician that serves that agenda over truth and the meaningful interests of Woodway.
With that understanding, I went to the second council meeting. Brand new Mayor Weber was absent, missing his second meeting. (Okay, allow me to indulge in humor. If MOB were to write a letter about Weber, he would exclaim our mayor has missed 50% of the meetings in his tenure. Not only that, but that he had employees play army in his backyard with city funds!) Back to the meeting. In his place Mayor Pro Tem Gil Lillard opened and officiated the meeting.
Calling for visitors to speak, Gil recognized MOB first. MOB got up and started his rants. He finished this time within 3 minutes. Next I rose to speak. I introduced myself to the council and asked for the same 10 minutes given MOB by Mayor Weber in the first meeting. Hearing no objection, I began. First I spoke about the great condition the city was in when handed to the new council, giving them a written report card of the city under the previous council. I asked them not to take credit for things those before them had accomplished. I then asked the new members to answer the following questions with a show of hands:
1. How many of them had toured city facilities prior to election? ( No hands raised.)
2. How many of them had reviewed the city budget and financial statement with the city controller prior to election? ( No hands raised.)
3. How many had met with city employees and asked about the work environment prior to election? ( No hands raised.)
4. How many had campaign help or involvement by Mike O'Bric? ( No hands raised.)
I then discussed the statistical results of the recent election, pointing out that with other facts (no new member has any volunteer history or city experience) voters had voted incumbents out more than voted them in. That understanding should cause smart men to be cautious and slow a rush to judgement of any kind. At the 3 minute mark, Mayor Pro Tem Lillard told me my time was up.
I protested but Lillard insisted. The week prior Mayor Weber allowed MOB 10 minutes, even though it was not approved. No other council member objected at that first meeting. Now as a voice in opposition to the OB Party, I was being shut down. So I simply asked Gil Lillard if he was going to discriminate against me. I asked a second time, and he stood and replied "Yes". This became his defining moment. MOB is shown favoritism, but those in opposition are not.
Amazing. I left and went into the lobby, asking others to come hear the truth. Instead, most people stayed in the council chamber. They stayed, but one by one, stood at the podium to speak against MOB and his lies. Councilman Don Baker stepped to the podium and spoke against Gil's decision as well. Don also called for an independent audit. Finally De Smith took the podium and deferred her time to me. I came back, and with passion, addressed the council.
Councilman Garner believes I attacked him and attacked Councilman Csibielski. That is incorrect. I spoke against his platform statements, his political statements in the paper. I spoke against him as a city councilman who spreads rumors via the Internet. I spoke directly against Dr. Csibielski's claim to bring integrity to the council when he printed MOB lies in his campaign literature. I spoke against his claim to not be a rubber stamp when in reality his wild claims were the words of MOB. I called on him to follow through with his campaign promises and shut down the "duplicate city hall" he claimed as wasteful spending, and save us the $100,000s in utility bills he said were wasteful. Since he said taxes had been repeatedly raised in the past, I told him to give the citizens a tax reduction. Finally, I told Gil he scared me without publicly disclosing his behavior. I have since exposed his behavior in my blog.
More than anything else, I spoke against MOB. I openly stood up and called him what he is -- a liar. I exposed the fact that he never has proof for any of his wild allegations, in spite of YEARS of making these claims. I told the new council how he had done similar things with Baylor's track program, similar things with the Marine Corp League. Baylor finally ran him off, and the Marine Corp League reprimanded him. It was now their turn to come clean with the citizens.
The first council meeting was memorable for MOB's 10 minute victory speech, favoritism repaid, and the new members taking control of the Woodway City Government. The second meeting was a response to those actions -- a ground swell against MOB, his agenda, and a rush by new members to foolish behavior. The time of Good Stewards is sadly past; the time of the OB Party begins. Next Blog...the Real OBs.
Looking back, I have two regrets. One - while we were great stewards, we were lousy politicians. I say that because in retrospect, we did not do the one thing all politicians do - brag on their accomplishments and abilities. I believed balancing the budget, holding tax rates, increasing spending on road repair, developing high construction standards, promoting quality commercial development, and standing with citizens when Oncor started cutting trees, that all these things would be noticed and appreciated by citizens. The incumbent backlash on election day said otherwise. My second regret was that instead of standing up to MOBs slander, lies, and wild allegations, we did nothing. At the time, I felt that "turning the other cheek" was the best course of action. I felt engaging him would serve to validate his hate and encourage him to continue. Unfortunately, reality was just the opposite. MOBs onslaught of letters, in the absence of a response, became "self validating" in many citizen's eyes.
I can't correct my first regret, of not being a savvy politician. Quiet frankly, I don't think I would if I could. It's not how I'm wired; it's not my value system. But the second regret, standing up to the city liar and deceiver, that's different. Both MOB and KOB have a history of hurting good people, and with the help of the new council members, are posed to hurt more.
My commitment is now to my family, to neighbors, to citizens of Woodway, and strangely to MOB. At the first council meeting, Mike O'Bric asked for "sins to be exposed and corrected". That is what I plan to do -- expose the OBs for who they really are, expose the OB Party and it's true agenda, and expose any politician that serves that agenda over truth and the meaningful interests of Woodway.
With that understanding, I went to the second council meeting. Brand new Mayor Weber was absent, missing his second meeting. (Okay, allow me to indulge in humor. If MOB were to write a letter about Weber, he would exclaim our mayor has missed 50% of the meetings in his tenure. Not only that, but that he had employees play army in his backyard with city funds!) Back to the meeting. In his place Mayor Pro Tem Gil Lillard opened and officiated the meeting.
Calling for visitors to speak, Gil recognized MOB first. MOB got up and started his rants. He finished this time within 3 minutes. Next I rose to speak. I introduced myself to the council and asked for the same 10 minutes given MOB by Mayor Weber in the first meeting. Hearing no objection, I began. First I spoke about the great condition the city was in when handed to the new council, giving them a written report card of the city under the previous council. I asked them not to take credit for things those before them had accomplished. I then asked the new members to answer the following questions with a show of hands:
1. How many of them had toured city facilities prior to election? ( No hands raised.)
2. How many of them had reviewed the city budget and financial statement with the city controller prior to election? ( No hands raised.)
3. How many had met with city employees and asked about the work environment prior to election? ( No hands raised.)
4. How many had campaign help or involvement by Mike O'Bric? ( No hands raised.)
I then discussed the statistical results of the recent election, pointing out that with other facts (no new member has any volunteer history or city experience) voters had voted incumbents out more than voted them in. That understanding should cause smart men to be cautious and slow a rush to judgement of any kind. At the 3 minute mark, Mayor Pro Tem Lillard told me my time was up.
I protested but Lillard insisted. The week prior Mayor Weber allowed MOB 10 minutes, even though it was not approved. No other council member objected at that first meeting. Now as a voice in opposition to the OB Party, I was being shut down. So I simply asked Gil Lillard if he was going to discriminate against me. I asked a second time, and he stood and replied "Yes". This became his defining moment. MOB is shown favoritism, but those in opposition are not.
Amazing. I left and went into the lobby, asking others to come hear the truth. Instead, most people stayed in the council chamber. They stayed, but one by one, stood at the podium to speak against MOB and his lies. Councilman Don Baker stepped to the podium and spoke against Gil's decision as well. Don also called for an independent audit. Finally De Smith took the podium and deferred her time to me. I came back, and with passion, addressed the council.
Councilman Garner believes I attacked him and attacked Councilman Csibielski. That is incorrect. I spoke against his platform statements, his political statements in the paper. I spoke against him as a city councilman who spreads rumors via the Internet. I spoke directly against Dr. Csibielski's claim to bring integrity to the council when he printed MOB lies in his campaign literature. I spoke against his claim to not be a rubber stamp when in reality his wild claims were the words of MOB. I called on him to follow through with his campaign promises and shut down the "duplicate city hall" he claimed as wasteful spending, and save us the $100,000s in utility bills he said were wasteful. Since he said taxes had been repeatedly raised in the past, I told him to give the citizens a tax reduction. Finally, I told Gil he scared me without publicly disclosing his behavior. I have since exposed his behavior in my blog.
More than anything else, I spoke against MOB. I openly stood up and called him what he is -- a liar. I exposed the fact that he never has proof for any of his wild allegations, in spite of YEARS of making these claims. I told the new council how he had done similar things with Baylor's track program, similar things with the Marine Corp League. Baylor finally ran him off, and the Marine Corp League reprimanded him. It was now their turn to come clean with the citizens.
The first council meeting was memorable for MOB's 10 minute victory speech, favoritism repaid, and the new members taking control of the Woodway City Government. The second meeting was a response to those actions -- a ground swell against MOB, his agenda, and a rush by new members to foolish behavior. The time of Good Stewards is sadly past; the time of the OB Party begins. Next Blog...the Real OBs.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
Time to Take a Stand
Sorry to take so long to put out this edition -- my original goal was to post every three to four days. Family life has a funny way of requiring my attention every now and then.
Backing up, my last blog dealt with the first council meeting. So many things occurred that I want to recap:
1. The total number of seats on the council is seven.
2. Four new council members took the oath of office and were seated.
3. None of the four have any city volunteer experience - not on any council, board, or commission. As a group, they now hold a majority.
4. The four new members nominated and seconded one of their group for mayor, and voted as a block to elect him to the position.
5. Woodway now has a mayor with no city experience ( Weber).
6. Woodway now has two former mayors as incumbents (Baker & Giddings).
7. The new members nominate and second one of their own as mayor pro tem, and he is elected.
8. Woodway now has both a mayor and mayor pro tem with zero city experience.
9. New Councilman Garner writes the four new members voted the " Party Line".
10.Woodway for the first time has a political party.
11. The common denominator of these new councilmen -- Mike O'Bric.
12. MOB is founder of the OB party. He donated money, helped write campaign flyers, and contributed in other ways to each new member's election campaign.
13. When the council moves to accept Roberts Rules of Order, Mayor Pro Tem Gil Lillard postpones the vote for a month because he said he has never read it.
14. In his first act, during the hearing of visitors, Mayor Weber overrides the time limit rule of limiting visitors to only speak for 3 minutes. This privilege is granted to one man Mike OBric, political mentor and party patron to Mayor Weber. He is allowed to rant for 10 minutes.
15. Mayor Weber's second action is to try and act on MOB's request for an investigation of Yost Zackhary. Incumbents remind him he can't do that during the hearing of visitors.
In addition to these realities were the events leading up to the first meeting:
1. Councilman Garner runs on a platform to evict Yost Zackhary from office.
2. Councilman Csibeilski promises not to be a rubber stamp, condemns what he calls a "second city hall worth $2,000,000", condemns $100,000 plus dollars in wasted utilities for this duplicate city hall, all while his campaign promises are the words put forth by MOB in his letters.
3. Councilman Garner, in a newspaper interview, states after being elected that he may have been "harsh" in his words about Yost. He quickly reverses course again by belittling his orientation with Yost (in his blog).
4. Councilman Garner tries to scare citizens by spreading a rumor about a rumor (sorry, sounds confusing) that a "high city official" was trying to undermine new members concerning the Arboretum, and that this official is going to pack the council chamber with an unfriendly crowd. ( The rumor turns out to be false, but interestingly the only other person to talk in detail about the rumor is MOB who actually mentions Yost by name).
I want to add one last thing, that happened outside the council chamber, something only a few people know. Friday prior to the first council meeting, Gil Lillard spoke to Don Baker and asked if he would take the Mayor's position again if he nominated him. Don replied he had decided not to, but that others had encouraged him to take the position if the votes are in his favor. Don said he would but only if Lillard, as a new member, would accept nomination as mayor pro tem. Gil said he didn't know if he should, but would think about it. Don called Gil back the following Monday, the day of the first council meeting. When he finally got hold of Gil, Gil said he would not take the position, he did not want it. So imagine Don's surprise when Gil failed to second Don's nomination, failed to even vote for Don. Imagine Don's additional surprise when Gil accepted the OB Party nomination for mayor pro tem and was elected. Although these actions are not illegal, they do expose the true character of Gil Lillard and how he deals with people.
I really expected to be doing other things after losing my council seat. But the sudden rise of the OB Party was just too scary to ignore. During a two week period, these four "Brickies" brought back-room politics to Woodway. Their focus was to quickly get Yost out of office, repaying MOB in the process, and follow the Party Line. With all their calls for a more open government, why did they "forget" to tell people they were part of a party, one with MOB's agenda? Why didn't they tell people they were supported by MOB? Why did all their "facts & figures" come from MOB and not city records? For the record, none of them had ever sought information pre-election from the city. They campaigned against wasteful spending, yet now the city has no real choice but to spend tens of thousands of dollars for an audit to confirm the independent audit you as citizens have already paid for. Why would Garner put forth a rumor to citizens when he was calling for a more responsible government? And finally, in perhaps the cruelest irony, if they truly thought people were concerned that Yost Zachary had too much power, why did they think that Mike OBric running the city through their majority would be acceptable?
In this moment I knew it was time to take a stand, expose these men and their OB Party in the "light of day". I decided to attend the 2nd council meeting and speak directly to the new council.
Next Blog - the Second Council Meeting.
Backing up, my last blog dealt with the first council meeting. So many things occurred that I want to recap:
1. The total number of seats on the council is seven.
2. Four new council members took the oath of office and were seated.
3. None of the four have any city volunteer experience - not on any council, board, or commission. As a group, they now hold a majority.
4. The four new members nominated and seconded one of their group for mayor, and voted as a block to elect him to the position.
5. Woodway now has a mayor with no city experience ( Weber).
6. Woodway now has two former mayors as incumbents (Baker & Giddings).
7. The new members nominate and second one of their own as mayor pro tem, and he is elected.
8. Woodway now has both a mayor and mayor pro tem with zero city experience.
9. New Councilman Garner writes the four new members voted the " Party Line".
10.Woodway for the first time has a political party.
11. The common denominator of these new councilmen -- Mike O'Bric.
12. MOB is founder of the OB party. He donated money, helped write campaign flyers, and contributed in other ways to each new member's election campaign.
13. When the council moves to accept Roberts Rules of Order, Mayor Pro Tem Gil Lillard postpones the vote for a month because he said he has never read it.
14. In his first act, during the hearing of visitors, Mayor Weber overrides the time limit rule of limiting visitors to only speak for 3 minutes. This privilege is granted to one man Mike OBric, political mentor and party patron to Mayor Weber. He is allowed to rant for 10 minutes.
15. Mayor Weber's second action is to try and act on MOB's request for an investigation of Yost Zackhary. Incumbents remind him he can't do that during the hearing of visitors.
In addition to these realities were the events leading up to the first meeting:
1. Councilman Garner runs on a platform to evict Yost Zackhary from office.
2. Councilman Csibeilski promises not to be a rubber stamp, condemns what he calls a "second city hall worth $2,000,000", condemns $100,000 plus dollars in wasted utilities for this duplicate city hall, all while his campaign promises are the words put forth by MOB in his letters.
3. Councilman Garner, in a newspaper interview, states after being elected that he may have been "harsh" in his words about Yost. He quickly reverses course again by belittling his orientation with Yost (in his blog).
4. Councilman Garner tries to scare citizens by spreading a rumor about a rumor (sorry, sounds confusing) that a "high city official" was trying to undermine new members concerning the Arboretum, and that this official is going to pack the council chamber with an unfriendly crowd. ( The rumor turns out to be false, but interestingly the only other person to talk in detail about the rumor is MOB who actually mentions Yost by name).
I want to add one last thing, that happened outside the council chamber, something only a few people know. Friday prior to the first council meeting, Gil Lillard spoke to Don Baker and asked if he would take the Mayor's position again if he nominated him. Don replied he had decided not to, but that others had encouraged him to take the position if the votes are in his favor. Don said he would but only if Lillard, as a new member, would accept nomination as mayor pro tem. Gil said he didn't know if he should, but would think about it. Don called Gil back the following Monday, the day of the first council meeting. When he finally got hold of Gil, Gil said he would not take the position, he did not want it. So imagine Don's surprise when Gil failed to second Don's nomination, failed to even vote for Don. Imagine Don's additional surprise when Gil accepted the OB Party nomination for mayor pro tem and was elected. Although these actions are not illegal, they do expose the true character of Gil Lillard and how he deals with people.
I really expected to be doing other things after losing my council seat. But the sudden rise of the OB Party was just too scary to ignore. During a two week period, these four "Brickies" brought back-room politics to Woodway. Their focus was to quickly get Yost out of office, repaying MOB in the process, and follow the Party Line. With all their calls for a more open government, why did they "forget" to tell people they were part of a party, one with MOB's agenda? Why didn't they tell people they were supported by MOB? Why did all their "facts & figures" come from MOB and not city records? For the record, none of them had ever sought information pre-election from the city. They campaigned against wasteful spending, yet now the city has no real choice but to spend tens of thousands of dollars for an audit to confirm the independent audit you as citizens have already paid for. Why would Garner put forth a rumor to citizens when he was calling for a more responsible government? And finally, in perhaps the cruelest irony, if they truly thought people were concerned that Yost Zachary had too much power, why did they think that Mike OBric running the city through their majority would be acceptable?
In this moment I knew it was time to take a stand, expose these men and their OB Party in the "light of day". I decided to attend the 2nd council meeting and speak directly to the new council.
Next Blog - the Second Council Meeting.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
First Council Meeting
The first council meeting was actually three events! First the standing mayor, in this case Don Baker, opened a council meeting with pre-election council members. Tabulation of election day votes, called canvassing voting results, is conducted. It is then voted into adoption. Unless there is evidence of impropriety at the booth, the results are accepted as a true reflection of citizen votes. The votes were accepted. Next the standing council moves to adopt the results. They did and the results were adopted. Finally, that first mini-meeting is brought to a close. As a point of reference - all council meetings are subject to the approved rules of Robert's Rules of Order.
The second event is a ceremony, where all new members elected to the council are sworn in. This is done by the city attorney ( David Cherry) and all new members sign an affidavit.
The final event is a second council meeting. Standing Mayor Don Baker called the meeting to order and opened with a prayer. This begins the first official meeting by the new council.
The first two items on the agenda become the election of mayor followed by the election of the mayor pro tem. Another point of reference -- cities differ on how a mayor is seated. Some are voted in by citizens in the general election ( think Waco), while some are are voted in by the council from among seated members. The path and mechanism is determined by approved city ordinance. Woodway's ordinance allows for the seated council to elect the mayor and mayor pro tem. Point of Reference - the term "pro tem" comes from the word temporary, so the mayor pro tem is actually a person that can serve as mayor temporarily or for a limited time.
David Cherry, city legal council, called for nominations. Incumbent Jane Kittner nominated Don Baker; after a moment, incumbent Scott Giddenings seconded. Immediately Bill Weber, new member, was nominated and seconded by fellow new members Paul Scibeilski and Chuck Garner. A vote was cast, and as noted by Chuck Garner in his blog, Bill Weber was elected by "party line" vote. Bill takes the mayor seat, voicing a word of thanks. By his words, Bill will be stumbling through the meeting since he has never been elected to a public office before. David Cherry is asked by Bill to continue and nominations for mayor pro tem begins. New member Gil Lillard is nominated and seconded again by party members Paul Scibeilski and Chuck Garner. No one else is nominated and Gil is elected mayor pro tem. Weber states he thinks as a matter of protocol, the mayor pro tem should be seated next to him.
The meeting is now in the hands of the new mayor. Following the agenda, he calls for the annual acceptance of Roberts Rules of Order, tenth addition. Mayor pro tem Lillard quickly makes the following motion - he wants to defer acceptance as he has not read Roberts Rules of Order. He asks for this to be postponed for a month, until the third council meeting. The motion is seconded by a new member. With the OB Party holding majority, it passes. Comment --The new council did not accept Roberts Rules of Order. Forget that it is taught in high school, used by almost all non-profit organizations. The OB party wants to take a month to look at it. Love the job but not the homework I guess.
Dear Citizens of Woodway, with dust settling on the first moments of the first meeting, here is a recap of your 10' Woodway City Council:
1. Four O'Bric party members with no experience in city service. No experience on city commissions. No experience on city boards. They nominated and elected the mayor and mayor pro tem from their ranks.
2. Three experienced incumbents ( no party affiliation). They have decades of city experience - service as mayors, as councilmen, and as members of Planning & Zoning among others. All have a proven track record of results and responsibility, verifiable by city records.
Change has come - did you know you elected the OB party to majority? is it what you expected?
Back to the meeting, a call for visitors to speak was made. The stated time limit is to be 3 minutes, but that is discretionary by the Mayor's voice. Party founder Mike O'Bric is the first to talk. He immediately asks for 5 minutes and and receives mayoral approval. Point of reference - Bill's first act is to grant special favor to the man who handled his election campaign.
Now MOB launches into all his lies and slanders against Yost Zakhary, while stating he represents all citizens. During his rant, he brings up a rumor of a clandestine action by Yost to scare people into thinking new members will shut down the Arboretum. Point of reference - the first and only other person to broadcast this rumor was Chuck Garner on his blog. Now five minutes into his speech, Mayor Weber reminds MOB he is up against the granted limit. Mike asks for more, stating his handicap of a "struggling voice" ( remember my earlier blog about the MOB sympathy technique?). The mayor laughs and allows him to continue. At the ten minute mark, the mayor urges him to wrap up again. Then Mayor Weber asks what action MOB is asking for, and must be reminded by incumbents that council can only do that with an agenda item, not a visitor's request. Remember Bill said he would stumble? His actions show he is stumbling towards MOB and the OB Party.
The meeting goes into closed session. The legal representatives were to advise new members on all pending litigation for/against the city, the most prominent being Karen OB's lawsuit against Woodway. At some point the council comes out, finishing misc items and adjoins.
A lot of folks turned out to observe the first meeting. Some well wishers. Some concerned citizens. Some wanting to understand the impact of four new members.
I did not attend the meeting knowing MOB would be taking a verbal "Victory Lap". And why not? His stable of party candidates all won. But I did file an open records act and get a recording of the meeting, using that to write this entry. The conduct and actions of the OB councilmen proves profound. They feel good, but their actions galvanize a number of citizens into motion. I am one of those citizens.
So what about this meeting caused such a backlash - wasn't this just basic stuff?
Next blog: Time to Take A Stand.
The second event is a ceremony, where all new members elected to the council are sworn in. This is done by the city attorney ( David Cherry) and all new members sign an affidavit.
The final event is a second council meeting. Standing Mayor Don Baker called the meeting to order and opened with a prayer. This begins the first official meeting by the new council.
The first two items on the agenda become the election of mayor followed by the election of the mayor pro tem. Another point of reference -- cities differ on how a mayor is seated. Some are voted in by citizens in the general election ( think Waco), while some are are voted in by the council from among seated members. The path and mechanism is determined by approved city ordinance. Woodway's ordinance allows for the seated council to elect the mayor and mayor pro tem. Point of Reference - the term "pro tem" comes from the word temporary, so the mayor pro tem is actually a person that can serve as mayor temporarily or for a limited time.
David Cherry, city legal council, called for nominations. Incumbent Jane Kittner nominated Don Baker; after a moment, incumbent Scott Giddenings seconded. Immediately Bill Weber, new member, was nominated and seconded by fellow new members Paul Scibeilski and Chuck Garner. A vote was cast, and as noted by Chuck Garner in his blog, Bill Weber was elected by "party line" vote. Bill takes the mayor seat, voicing a word of thanks. By his words, Bill will be stumbling through the meeting since he has never been elected to a public office before. David Cherry is asked by Bill to continue and nominations for mayor pro tem begins. New member Gil Lillard is nominated and seconded again by party members Paul Scibeilski and Chuck Garner. No one else is nominated and Gil is elected mayor pro tem. Weber states he thinks as a matter of protocol, the mayor pro tem should be seated next to him.
The meeting is now in the hands of the new mayor. Following the agenda, he calls for the annual acceptance of Roberts Rules of Order, tenth addition. Mayor pro tem Lillard quickly makes the following motion - he wants to defer acceptance as he has not read Roberts Rules of Order. He asks for this to be postponed for a month, until the third council meeting. The motion is seconded by a new member. With the OB Party holding majority, it passes. Comment --The new council did not accept Roberts Rules of Order. Forget that it is taught in high school, used by almost all non-profit organizations. The OB party wants to take a month to look at it. Love the job but not the homework I guess.
Dear Citizens of Woodway, with dust settling on the first moments of the first meeting, here is a recap of your 10' Woodway City Council:
1. Four O'Bric party members with no experience in city service. No experience on city commissions. No experience on city boards. They nominated and elected the mayor and mayor pro tem from their ranks.
2. Three experienced incumbents ( no party affiliation). They have decades of city experience - service as mayors, as councilmen, and as members of Planning & Zoning among others. All have a proven track record of results and responsibility, verifiable by city records.
Change has come - did you know you elected the OB party to majority? is it what you expected?
Back to the meeting, a call for visitors to speak was made. The stated time limit is to be 3 minutes, but that is discretionary by the Mayor's voice. Party founder Mike O'Bric is the first to talk. He immediately asks for 5 minutes and and receives mayoral approval. Point of reference - Bill's first act is to grant special favor to the man who handled his election campaign.
Now MOB launches into all his lies and slanders against Yost Zakhary, while stating he represents all citizens. During his rant, he brings up a rumor of a clandestine action by Yost to scare people into thinking new members will shut down the Arboretum. Point of reference - the first and only other person to broadcast this rumor was Chuck Garner on his blog. Now five minutes into his speech, Mayor Weber reminds MOB he is up against the granted limit. Mike asks for more, stating his handicap of a "struggling voice" ( remember my earlier blog about the MOB sympathy technique?). The mayor laughs and allows him to continue. At the ten minute mark, the mayor urges him to wrap up again. Then Mayor Weber asks what action MOB is asking for, and must be reminded by incumbents that council can only do that with an agenda item, not a visitor's request. Remember Bill said he would stumble? His actions show he is stumbling towards MOB and the OB Party.
The meeting goes into closed session. The legal representatives were to advise new members on all pending litigation for/against the city, the most prominent being Karen OB's lawsuit against Woodway. At some point the council comes out, finishing misc items and adjoins.
A lot of folks turned out to observe the first meeting. Some well wishers. Some concerned citizens. Some wanting to understand the impact of four new members.
I did not attend the meeting knowing MOB would be taking a verbal "Victory Lap". And why not? His stable of party candidates all won. But I did file an open records act and get a recording of the meeting, using that to write this entry. The conduct and actions of the OB councilmen proves profound. They feel good, but their actions galvanize a number of citizens into motion. I am one of those citizens.
So what about this meeting caused such a backlash - wasn't this just basic stuff?
Next blog: Time to Take A Stand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)