AnonymousBy Jayne Marcus
The drama continues with the City of Santa Barbara, its City Councilmembers, and the fight over the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) seat between Cathy Murillo and Jason Dominguez.
As many other edhat readers have written, Dominguez was appointed to the SBCAG seat about a month ago by the City Council. Earlier this month, the same council revoked his seat and placed Murillo in its place, which is a tradition for seated mayors as they are the only elected officials to be part of the very influential and politically charged group. Obviously, this has caused controversy on both sides of the aisle.
But now, it’s being reported that a lawyer is threatening to sue the City over this decision. Attorney John Thyne is firmly asking the city to reconsider its removal of Councilman Dominguez and revert back to the January 9th decision where he was appointed. Thyne has not identified his client, although I’m sure we can all guess who it is.
So, because someone doesn’t like the outcome of a legal and binding vote, they’re now going to threaten to sue the City? It’s akin to not being chosen to play kickball and then tattle-telling for the teacher to take the ball away. Dominguez was out-voted, plain and simple. Was it ethical? Who knows, is anything in politics really ethical? It wasn’t illegal, and he has every right to fight the decision, but please do not use a lawyer that will negatively affect our already hurting economy.
We don’t need any more of our taxpayer dollars going to fight this petty issue. Get over it Jason Dominguez, and move on. We have a community to rebuild.
Do you have an opinion on something local? Share it with us at ed@edhat.com. The views and opinions expressed in Op-Ed articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of edhat.
From the op-ed: “So, because someone doesn’t like the outcome of a legal and binding vote, they’re now going to threaten to sue the City?”
Um, actually someone (Murillo and Friedman doing the bidding of the Democratic Central Committee) didn’t like the outcome of a legal and binding vote taken January 9th to appoint Dominguez, and broke laws to force Dominguez to be yanked from SBCAG and Murillo installed.
You do know that Ms. Knecht works for Mr. Colonne, right? When she said that it was a new vote she was giving the legal opinion of the City Attorney’s office. Thanks for picking that nit. The CIty Council meetings are televised . You should tune in sometime.
To Mas Gaviota @1:20 P.M – The City Attorney, in an e-mail to Thyne, conceded the fact that the Feb 6 vote was indeed a reconsideration of the January 9 vote, but he justified the Feb 6 vote by stating that council rules were only suggestions ( or some such nonsense); Yet the written reason given for the rule change in September of 2015 was that the new rules were being implemented to protect the civil right of due process.
You do know that Ms. Knecht works for Mr.Calonne , right? When she said that it was a new vote she was giving the legal opinion of the City Attorney’s office. Thanks for picking that nit. The CIty Council meetings are televised . You should tune in sometime. Your boy Thyne lost in his one bid for election, now he is trying to make himself relevant.
OMG! Can we move on to something else? GEEZA LOUIZA like there is nothing else that needs attention in this town? Isn’t council or any other governmental entity ever allowed to change their collective minds? There are plenty of other boards/commissions etc. for Jason to work on.
Giving Jason something to “work on” isn’t the problem here. A power hungry, lawless mayor IS the problem. But hey, ignorance must be bliss, right?
The mayor is the problem.
Calling Dominguez a bully is way off base. The reader obviously hasn’t seen Murillo in action very often and they certainly haven’t kept up with what’s going on at Council or the SBCAG. Murillo and Friedman pulled a stunt which is getting the city into a lawsuit. They didn’t have a valid Council Resolution when they agendize the meeting. They didn’t follow Rosenberg’s rules of order. They lost. They couldn’t agendize the vote. If Rowse had agendize to vote the vote would have needed for votes which is 2/3 majority. —–
While you might not want to go over this again, this is a critical moment for our City. Here’s why:
Reconsideration in Parliamentary Procedure means “to take up for consideration a second time, as a motion or a vote, as with the view of reversing or modifying action taken.” It is clear that the item scheduled by Murillo and Friedman last week was a reconsideration and nothing more. Period. Full stop. Dominguez was removed and a new vote to appoint a new appointee to SBCAG was conducted. – That IS reconsideration of the January 9th vote!
As you know from a post on edhat the action to remove Dominguez and install Murillo as the SBCAG appointee was against the City’s own Rules of Order and invalid. Why? The Council Resolution used to Agendize the item had been rescind in 2009. Additionally if it had been properly Agendized it need a 2/3 majority required to pass, instead, it passed with a simple majority.
This action must be nullified. Moreover, the Council must order an independent investigation of both Council and City policies to uncover how this decision was allowed to go unchecked. Furthermore, to ensure this never happens again, the investigation must extend into City policies where the City has broken its own rules or where similar decision were allowed to go unchecked.
To restore the faith of residents Council must nullify last weeks action and call for an independent investigation into all Council and City policies. Failure to do so will further erode the trust residents have in Council and the City and cause residents to further question the leadership of the Mayor and the entire City Council.
The previous posts on this said the revote was done in violation of the adopted rules of order for the City Council. If they violated their own rules, then the vote should be rescinded. If the past year has taught us anything, it is that the rule of law will (might?) save us. We can’t just ignore the rules because we liked the outcome.
I do believe it’s time to start thinking seriously of a recall election regarding Murillo. We cannot afford the luxury of her abject ignorance and disregard for her position as mayor. Enough is enough.
It was a new vote, 100% legal. Thyne found a plaintiff,and filed the lawsuit to get some free advertising.
Funny that when conservatives re-write the rules or ignore them for their benefit it’s called power politics. When liberals do it they call it criminal. I reckon our fair city has to mirror what is happening in Washington DC to please the 35% of the population that likes a criminal in charge with an army of lawyers to obstruct and obfuscate. LAWYERS FOR ALL.
Murillo is over her head. The drowning has started…
The city council decided that it would be best to have an at large, rather than a district, elected official, the mayor, as the SBCAG representitive.
In September, 2015, the Santa Barbara City council voted to change to rules on how council votes are reconsidered. Those new rules were put in place for the purpose of protecting the public and city council member’s right to due process (a civil right under the U.S Constitution). On February 6, the City Council violated the civil rights of the people and City Council members by ignoring the rules intended to protect said rights. Also, the City Attorney has conceded the facts that the Feb 6 vote was indeed a reconsideration, not a new vote.
So, to be sure I have the story straight: Murillo fought for and got the whole district election thing when she wanted to be a district representative. Then, once she was elected as district representative, she left the position to become mayor. Now that she’s mayor, she doesn’t want a district representative representing the City on SBCAG, and wants only “at-large” representation on the SBCAG? Boy, this mayor of yours must REALLY enjoy having her cake and eating it too…..
Next thing you know Mayor Murillo is going to have all city employees looking for the duplicate key to the wardroom icebox where the strawberries are kept….”Ahhh, the strawberries…that’s where I had them…..geometric logic….duplicate key….” Let’s give Cathy some ball-bearings to roll incessantly in her hand while we watch the train wreck in real time.
Look all lawyers are looking for some free advertising. Thyne is no choir boy. Reference his DUI and violation of parole which crushed his political dreams. The City Council has the right to name their representitive to SCAB. They simply decided that they would send an at large elected representative, Mayor Murillo. She also has much more experience as an elected official than Dominguez.
I voted for Murillo, but I’m highly disappointed in this move. Dominguez is being a CouncilBully, which does not look well on him. It’s clear that Murillo and Dominguez want the SBCAG position because of the power it holds. From what I’m seeing this past month, I would not give either Murillo or Dominguez my mayoral vote in 4 years. Tread lightly you two.
This is going to make the District 3 seat very important. It’s important that the next person is not tied to the Murillo, Hard, Friedman or the Dominguez, Sneddon, Rowes vote.
I’m as irritated as the next guy when lawsuits against the public are threatened, but in this case, it’s justified. This appears to be Murillo regularly manipulating things for her own benefit, and she needs to be shut down hard, early in her mayor years. Elected officials are supposed to represent the people’s will, not use procedures to impose their will on the public. I’m fed up with the partisanship, and posturing; so are most citizens.
Once upon a time there was a Soap Opera called Santa Barbara, then we became one…..
As the circus at City Hall continues, let’s not forget that newly re-elected Council Member Gregg Hart is busy with his eyes on his next prize as County Supervisor. If he’s successful, that will leave his seat vacant, another part of the City unrepresented and the dysfunction and musical chairs will continue. The decisions being made on the dais seem more focused on how they benefit those who sit there, rather than the public they’re supposed to serve–not that he’s providing stellar constituent service anyway. This latest go-round shows what a mistake the district elections was.
When asked whether or not the 2nd vote (the “reconsideration”) was legal and valid, Assistant City Attorney Sarah Knecht responded, “I haven’t had time to think this through.”
Clearly, we’ve got the best and brightest working for us at City Hall.