Hello. My name is Bruce Deutsch. You may have seen me around, but probably dont know me. I have lived in Dunsmuir since 2008, but -- after learning of the factions battling in the city -- I decided to not wander into the fray. I had also intended to stay off of the Dunsmuir forums. Until now. I showed up at the council meeting Thursday. It was a last minute decision to attend. I was standing in the line at the Thriftway when I heard someone mention the meeting. I did not even know where the meeting was held. Had I known I was going to end up at the meeting, I probably would have made sure to have my Spring haircut and beard trim. When I walked into the room, I only knew two people. I knew a few extra names from having watched videos of the meetings online, but that was it. I honestly did not know an Arth from an Arliss. I knew the mayor, because he lives next door to me, and we run into each other occasionally coming and going. And I knew Councilor Wilde having met her a few times over the years. From my recall, all of those interactions were cordial. What I am trying to say is that I am not part of any faction. There is an old saying in the South. I dont have a dog in that hunt. That dog just woke up. When I saw the video of that meeting, as it is posted just below, I was shocked, first, to see myself on the YouTube thumbnail. Then, I was shocked at how much weight I had gained. But when I got to my statement in the meeting, and saw that there was this large text box implying that I had been censured by the council for speaking out of order. How did this appear on the official copy of the meeting. How can my honor be smeared like this? Are the videos that are sold meant to be official copies, or propaganda? Who do I complain to? I really would like some advice. I can not believe that, after my twenty two years of service that I should have my honor besmirched for simply fulfilling my civic duty. I would like to make sure that no copy leaves the city office with this note on it. Now, back to the dog. I want to make two things clear here. I had no dog in the hunt, but since seeing that video, I want to make myself available to anyone working on the recall, or on the packages going out to the DA. I intend to send a letter, along with a copy of the video and a copy of the screengrab of the YouTube thumbnail. I would like to close by making my first substantive contribution to the effort to right the injustice that took place this week. A bit of advice. Everyone is looking at the legal basis to this all wrong. Yes, there may be some legal condiments in charges relating to the Brown Act. You -- and they -- and their attorney -- are looking in the wrong direction. I just saw a post by Councilwoman Wilde gloating over the letter she sent to her pal the DA. She talked about lawsuits and how frivolous they can be. Doesnt Mr. Hicks know that the DA is not going to get involved with lawsuits. He is going to be looking at what this fundamentally is. Corruption. And all four of the individuals who now are doing their happy dance . . . all anyone has to do is look at the timing of meetings, activities and contracts/contacts throughout the week, and suddenly, the video of the April 1 meeting shows the three Councilors stating that they should put an ad for the position, but they want a lawyer who works for THEM. And they LIKE this person. And in the mind-boggling course of a couple minutes, the three all seem to flow to the idea that the prudent thing to do would be to hire him permanently. A few moments of acting, and the deal is done. A fabulous no-bid contract, with the mayor and a fellow councilor refusing to participate in the meeting because hiring someone this way is grossly illegal, and the three of them who have never negotiated a contract have a signed and sealed deal just before the regular scheduled meeting. And then, in order to make sure that no one can question anything, Councilor Wilde throws out the agenda. And then, when I began to ask her a question, she got up and walked out. I would wager that if it had not been me that was first in line with a question about the April 1 meeting, she would have walked out on whoever had started to question her. All part of the plan to play things out until Mr. Hicks can get his bonus in hand. Speaking of Mr. Hicks, (and again, I only know him from his performance in the April 1 meeting) when I showed the video to a lawyer friend of mine from DC, he immediately thought that that video should be sent to the State Bar. He spent the meeting saying that he could be fired on a days notice, and this would be temporary, and then turned around and came up with a contract drastically different. Finally, it seems to me from the outside that the big picture is important here, too. They are clearly trying to run as many people out of jobs so they can replace them with their friends. Again. Simple word, and it is not Brown. It is Corruption, spelled with felonies. No-bid contract. Not even so much as an interview contract. And to whoever decided to dishonor me with the YouTube stunt, I was honestly not going to get involved any further. Until. Sorry to meet all with this, but as you can tell, I do not appreciate being dishonored in this way.
Posted on: Sun, 06 Apr 2014 22:05:35 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015