NotGregLetiecq, 16. September 2008, 18:33:
Okay. So. Is anyone else watching this? The Supervisors voted 5 to 3 in favor of a motion by Frank Principi to add a discussion of Stirrup’s Duecaster appointment to the topics to discuss for closed session.
Those in favor: Principi, Caddigan, May, Jenkens, and Nohe.
Those opposed: Greg Letiecq’s Errand Boys, Covington
There had been a discussion about a DVD submitted into the record by Eric Byler, of the 9500Liberty You Tube channel, but I am unclear about whether or not they agreed at the time to watch it in closed session.
When the Board reconvened about 90 minutes later, the other appointments all passed unanimously except for Supervisor Nohe abstaining on the vote to confirm Supervisor May’s appointment, Kris Nohe (his wife) to the same Human Services committee for which Robert Duecaster was about to see a vote. When Chairman Stewart introduced the Duecaster appointment, there was a long discussion. Jenkins said he hadn’t had the opportunity to view the video embedded above.
So, he asked that the vote be delayed until the Board could see it privately.
Supervisor Stirrup responded that there was prejudice in the video (I believe he meant prejudice AGAINST Duecaster, ironically enough).
Supervisor Principi said, “I’m in the same boat” with Supervisor Jenkins, and that he was torn between following the usual procedure (my phrasing) and using his vote to express his concern about a man whose “reputation precedes him.”
Chairman Stewart said they should not watch the video before voting because 9500Liberty was “against the Board’s Resolution” (not exactly true but okay).
Supervisor Principi said we don’t need to watch someone else’s interpretation, we have our own footage from Channel 23’s coverage of Citizens’ Time. He said we can ask our communications department to edit the same three speeches together from their own footage. He repeated the request that the vote be delayed until such time as a Channel 23 version of the same events could be produced for the Board’s edification.
Supervisor Caddigan said she planned to vote against the appointment. She said she had not heard about any of this beforehand, and felt uncomfortable voting in the affirmative if she was being denied the opportunity to see the video. She said she was disturbed by some of the Duecaster quotes that were read to her at Citizens’ Time.
Supervisor Nohe said that while he was disturbed by the comments of Mr. Duecaster, which he called “deeply offensive to me,” he was going to vote yes out of respect to Supervisor Stirrup, not out of respect toward his appointment.
Chairman Stewart said that he doubted whether the Duecaster quotes were accurate. It seemed to me that it was in Stewart’s power to deny the Board an opportunity to see the DVD, and it was in his power to force a vote.
They then voted, as RobbPearson reported on the previous thread:
FOR Duecaster’s appointment:
AGAINST Duecaster’s appointment:
After the vote, Supervisor Jenkins said this is the first time he had ever been denied the opportunity to see information pertinent to a vote. Because he had been contacted by so many concerned citizens, he asked County Attorney Horton if, now that the DVD was in the public record, would it be made available to citizens. The answer was yes.