Opinion
City Council decides to keep investigation into one of it’s own a secret
When governments have to release information they really don’t want the public to know about, they’ll release it late Friday afternoon. That’s the one time in the week virtually no one is paying attention to the “news cycle”. In fact, a Friday before a long weekend is as close to a perfect time to bury some information as you can get. Reporters are people too. They’ve got long weekend plans and they’re trying to get done early like everyone else. Reporters are just as anxious as the average person to get home and desperately finish packing so they can rush out and pay more more to gas up (long weekend price hike coincidence/tradition). More likely in these days of covid they’re just rushing home to fill up a glass (also more expensive but worth it at virtually any price, right?).
That’s why it was so interesting to see this news release from Red Deer City Council on Friday afternoon at 4:09. It was actually posted to the city website at 4:05, so now I now it takes about 4 minutes for an email to get to me (It’s those fun little details that make the world go round eh?).
Actually I didn’t see it at 4:09 because like most people I don’t sit still in the afternoon watching my inbox to react immediately to every email. Maybe I should. Instead I typically check my email periodically, and typically that happens far less regularly late Friday afternoon.. especially on the Friday of a long weekend.. especially this particular Friday. Instead of seeing this at 4:09 I was rushing from a quick trip to Calgary to pick up our oldest boy (U of C student) and I was transitioning to hockey coach, going over some U13 drills on the Hockey Canada website to prepare for our late afternoon U13B West Country hockey practice. (The kids were awesome by the way). Then it was a meeting with team parents. Then it was home to late supper. Then it was movie night with our two boys. Then to bed without even checking email and phone messages.
Just as they hoped (in my own humble opinion) I and many others didn’t see this email right away. Now that I have seen it, I’m in quite a conundrum. It’s a long weekend and I have plans to continue painting trim on our house. I also plan to continue safe social distancing practices by staying away from loved ones for the second Thanksgiving in a row. While painting I’ll also wonder why our governments and doctors aren’t aggressively pushing for early treatment so we can relieve pressure on our hospitals and save some lives and stop living in fear.. but I digress.
Saturday morning I started the typical upkeep of Todayville.com and periodically checked email messages. Then I came across this beauty sent Friday afternoon at 4:09. In case you haven’t seen it yet, here it is….
News Release from the City of Red Deer
Second Code of Conduct investigation closes
(Red Deer, Alberta) – An investigation stemming from a code of conduct complaint received by City Council on May 7, 2021, has closed, and a majority of Council did not accept the investigation report at yesterday’s Council meeting. The investigation is considered complete and will remain confidential under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FOIP).
“City Council’s Code of Conduct bylaw is a set of expectations for Council member’s conduct and behaviour. This is the second of two Code of Conduct complaints that were investigated in 2021,” said Deputy Mayor Lawrence Lee.
All municipalities in Alberta are required by the Municipal Government Act (MGA) to have a Code of Conduct Bylaw that sets shared expectations for conduct or behaviour. The bylaw outlines how members should conduct themselves while carrying out their responsibilities and establishes a review and investigation process when a complaint is received. The City of Red Deer passed its Code of Conduct Bylaw (2608-2018) on July 23, 2018.
After a review committee of three Council members initially reviewed the complaint, there was a majority vote to proceed to formal investigation. An investigator was hired to investigate and report back to City Council, and City Council had three meetings on this issue.
“Upholding City Council’s Code of Conduct, procedural fairness, relationships and role clarity are essential as we work to ensure good governance that is in the best interest of the organization and our community,” said Deputy Mayor Lawrence Lee.
Council passed a second resolution directing the confidential report be shared with the City Manager to prepare a confidential memorandum outlining “lessons learned” to be brought back to Council in the first quarter of 2022. The memorandum should make recommendations on the integration and relationships of the Mayor and Council’s office with administration. Through the City Manager, the staff and council will work together to move forward.
For more information about City Council’s Code of Conduct Bylaw, visit www.reddeer.ca
So what does all this mean? Well we know there was an investigation into the conduct of at least one member of city council. We know three councillors reviewed this complaint. Then the majority of council decided we (taxpayers) should pay an investigator to look into this complaint. (That doesn’t sound cheap). We know council met three times to discuss this complaint. Then the report came back and the majority of Red Deer City Council did not accept the investigator’s report that we (taxpayers) paid for. And.. we know the investigation is considered complete and that it will “remain confidential” until someone pays for and goes through the process of applying for a Freedom of Information Request.
WE also know this might be the last time this council will meet before the 2021 Municipal Election. What a brutal meeting to have hanging over your head as you gun for re-election! Makes me feel horrible for all those candidates I know (and in some cases REALLY like) who have to face the electorate in a few days. Kind of makes me SUPER curious about the contents of this second investigation. Seems like precisely the kind of information I’d like to have before I decide who to vote for in a few days. But as is happening so much these days, our elected officials are saving us from the details and we should rest easy knowing that they have our best interests in mind (you know, before their own).
So we’ll have to imagine how Thursday’s “in-camera” conversation went (and thousands of voters will be doing just that). I guess someone must have said something like “I know this seemed like a big deal back in the spring. I know we talked about it in three separate meetings and that three of us reviewed it and we all decided we should hire an investigator to look into this. Buuuuuuut. That was such a long time ago. Now it’s fall and with an election just days away, frankly we’ve got better things to worry about.” To which the majority of council must have said something like “You know. You’re right! I don’t know what we were thinking back there in the spring. The truth is there’s nothing to see here. Why don’t we prove it by telling the people who pay us absolutely nothing about why we spent our time and their money investigating a complaint that three of us reviewed in the spring and the majority of us voted to proceed to formal investigation.” Then I guess someone called for a vote. When only Buck Buchanan and Dianne Wyntjes disagreed, (as reported here in this really interesting opinion piece/video by 2017 Council candidate Calvin Goulet-Jones) those seeking reelection all took off to presumably check on their election signs.
Actually this being the “Second” Code of Conduct investigation, it reminds me there was a “First” Code of Conduct investigation back in April. Although that investigation started 1 month before this one, it actually wrapped up more than two months ago. Investigation #1 resulted in Councillor Buck Buchanan facing some embarrassing disciplinary measures. Remember that? That news release was also released late in the afternoon, but NOT late Friday afternoon. The news release regarding investigation number 1 was released at 4:59 Monday, July 26. Media types know this means it’s going to be all the rage come Tuesday morning and will have lots of time to build up for the rest of the week. Here’s what that looked like (in case you’re keeping score of the Council Code of Conduct investigations at home)….
News Release from the City of Red Deer
Code of Conduct investigation closes with sanctions for Councillor Buchanan
After a review committee of three Council members initially reviewed the complaint, and by majority vote determined that it should proceed to formal investigation, SAGE Analytics Inc. was hired to investigate and report back to City Council.
SAGE is a municipal consulting firm with expertise in governance evaluation, dispute resolution, and council code of conduct complaint investigations. SAGE utilized a process that included interviews and follow-up with both parties, witness interviews, a review of related correspondence received by The City, document review, analysis and report writing.
With the investigation complete, the findings conclude that Councillor Buchanan breached three sections in the Council Code of Conduct Bylaw:
- 7.1, which states “members shall uphold the law established by the Parliament of Canada and the Legislature of Alberta and the bylaws, policies and procedures adopted by Council.”
- 7.2, which states “members shall respect the Municipality as an institution, its bylaws, policies and procedures and shall encourage public respect for the Municipality, its bylaws, policies and procedures” and
- 4.1(d), which states, City Council must “arrange their private affairs and conduct themselves in a manner that promotes public confidence.”
According to the findings, a social media post made by Councillor Buchanan in January 2021, combined with his prior actions, amounted to a breach of the bylaw. SAGE determined these actions were disrespectful to the local pandemic response efforts and increased a division in the community between individuals in favour of and opposed to health restrictions. SAGE’s report finds that through Councillor Buchanan’s actions, The City’s reputation was damaged, and The City’s pandemic response efforts were negatively impacted. They also determined he demonstrated a pattern of conduct where he made negative comments that did not promote public confidence in The City’s pandemic response efforts.
Having accepted that Councillor Buchanan contravened three sections of the Bylaw, Council considered the sanctions recommended by SAGE and ultimately resolved by majority vote to require that Councillor Buchanan:
- Issue a public apology to Red Deer residents, businesses, staff, and Council for his actions and social media post on January 27, 2021, which caused increased confusion and division in the community during a time of crisis; and that this apology be provided to the satisfaction of Council, during a public portion of a Council meeting.
- Arrange an in-person meeting with the AHS Central Zone Medical Director, or designate to offer a personal apology to Alberta Health Services for any harm caused by his public comments during the pandemic response.
- Be suspended from all Council committees and all Deputy Mayor rotation duties until sincere apologies are provided.
- Complete social media training hired and paid for by The City of Red Deer that aligns with typical media training for City staff.
The investigation is considered complete. Councillor Buchanan continues to serve as Red Deer City Councillor.
This is the first formal Code of Conduct complaint received by The City of Red Deer.
So we have two Code of Conduct investigations against this council. The first looks kind of like an expensive slap on the wrist to Buch Buchanan for daring to ask on Twitter whether AHS had shown up at a restaurant in Sylvan Lake that was protesting covid restrictions. (The Horror). The second complaint? Well it looked like a bigger deal back in the spring.
Just before I let you go back to Turkey prep and avoiding your loved ones I’d like to offer some free advice to the members of City Council who voted to keep the details of investigation number two from the people who pay for everything they do and for their salaries (as insufficient as they may seem to those who have to cash the cheques). I admit this has to be free because in all likelihood no one in their right mind would pay for it. However I’m avoiding the paint brush for just a few more minutes. Here goes: I really think it might be a good idea to tell voters who was investigated and why. That’s it. The problem with keeping this quiet is that it will tarnish not just the unfortunate soul(s) who was investigated. Now all of you who voted this way will be part of that same embarrassment and presumably you could pay the price for this.
Yes 31 percent of the 60 percent of Canadians who vote, continually vote for Justin Trudeau no matter what aboriginal female minister he turfs for daring to question his friends at Canada’s most notorious construction firm, or how many times he wears black face or how many times he declares a holiday to recognize one of the most serious problems in Canada and then forgets he might be the most important person to appear at events on that day and accidentally takes his family on a private jet to an 18 million dollar hideaway (and then forgot to hide very well). No matter what, some elected officials will have a blind following. But you are definitely taking at least a small risk here. Some people are paying attention (hi Calvin). And some people talk to other people. And some of those people will be voting. And some people will jump to the conclusion that you voted to keep this quiet because you care about something else, anything else, more than you care about the voters who you are undoubtedly shaking hands with at the farmers market right now while you tell them that nothing is more important to you than they are. But something is more important. You should tell us.
Sorry for rambling. I’ve completely run out of things to say. If you want to run a beer over to our place to reward me for doing a second rate painting job.. just keep your distance. I’ve got a valid negative covid rapid test that has to last until I get another one and another one before my vaccine kicks in.
From the Brownstone Institute
Morens implicated Margaret (Marg) Moore, known colloquially as “The FOIA lady” in trying to hide information from the American people, particularly that related to the origins of Covid-19, which is a felony.
A relatively unknown public records officer at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is now at the centre of a burgeoning scandal involving Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
The saga unfolded after subpoenaed emails belonging to David Morens, a former top advisor to Anthony Fauci, revealed that someone had taught him to game the system and avoid emails being captured by FOIA requests.
“i learned from our foia lady here how to make emails disappear after i am foia’d but before the search starts, so i think we are all safe,” Morens wrote in a Feb 24, 2021, email. “Plus i deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to gmail.”
Morens implicated Margaret (Marg) Moore, known colloquially as “The FOIA lady” in trying to hide information from the American people, particularly that related to the origins of Covid-19, which is a felony.
It sparked an investigation by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic to expose what Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) called a “cover-up.”
A letter to NIH director Monica Bertagnolli in May suggested “a conspiracy at the highest levels” of these once trusted public health institutions.
“If what appears in these documents is true, this is an apparent attack on public trust and must be met with swift enforcement and consequences for those involved,” Wenstrup wrote.
Wenstrup said there was evidence that a former chief of staff of Fauci’s might have used intentional misspellings — such as “Ec~Health” instead of “EcoHealth” — to prevent emails from being captured in keyword searches by FOIA officials.
Stay Informed with Brownstone Institute
Today, Wenstrup announced a subpoena to compel Moore (The FOIA lady) to appear for a deposition on October 4, 2024, saying that she’d repeatedly resisted these efforts and delayed the Select Subcommittee’s investigation.
“Her alleged scheme to help NIH officials delete COVID-19 records and use their personal emails to avoid FOIA is appalling and deserves a thorough investigation,” said Wenstrup.
“Holding Ms. Moore accountable for any role she played in undermining American trust is a step towards improving the lack of accountability and absence of transparency rapidly spreading across many agencies within our federal government,” he added.
Moore, however, has indicated through her lawyers that she would invoke her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Her lawyers wrote to Wenstrup explaining that she’d cooperated with the Select Subcommittee to find “an alternative” to sitting for an interview, including expediting her own FOIA request for her own documents.
They also explained that Morens’ emails suggesting Moore gave tips “about avoiding FOIA,” were misleading because Morens, under oath said, “That was a joke…She didn’t give me advice about how to avoid FOIA.”
Nonetheless, Moore’s decision to plead the Fifth has only fuelled concern over the lack of transparency and accountability of one of the nation’s top health research institutions.
It’s not over until the FOIA lady sings!
Further reading: The great FOIA dodge
Republished from the author’s Substack
Author
From the Brownstone Institute
Mere words cannot restrain our aspiring censors from weaponizing their power to silence dissent. Enemies of the First Amendment vow to “hammer it out of existence,” as John Kerry explained this week, and they are prepared to circumvent legal protections to achieve their aims at all costs.
Kerry, speaking on a panel on climate change at the World Economic Forum, lamented what he regards as insufficient censorship of “disinformation” and called on his allies to “win the ground, win the right to govern” in order to be “free be able to implement change” despite the “major block” of the First Amendment.
But a survey of the dismal state of free speech in the United States shows that Kerry and his allies have already developed means to sidestep the “major block” of our founding documents. Hillary Clinton herself has floated the idea of criminal penalties for the spreading of “misinformation.”
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has similarly called for “reining in the media environment” so that people cannot just “spew information.”
Earlier this year, journalist Mark Steyn was forced to pay $1 million in “punitive damages” for mocking a climate scientist and comparing him to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky.
The prevailing attorney urged the jury to inflict the punishment to demonstrate the ramifications for engaging in “climate denialism,” which he compared to President Trump’s “election denialism.”
In New York, State Attorney General Letitia James has demonstrated the threat that change poses to our foundational freedoms. During her 2018 campaign for office, James proudly broadcasted her antipathy to the First Amendment, pledging to weaponize the justice system against a range of political enemies from President Donald Trump to the National Rifle Association.
Her intolerance for dissent led her to target VDare, Peter Brimelow’s immigration-restrictionist website. Unable to find a crime, James used her office to drown the organization in legal costs until it was forced to cease operations. Despite having never advocated for violence or committed libel, Brimelow and his group were guilty of dissent in a jurisdiction that elected a zealot.
Stay Informed with Brownstone Institute
Steve Bannon, Julian Assange, Douglass Mackey, Roger Ver, and Pavel Durov have undergone similarly brazen persecutions that debunk the supposed safety of free speech protections in the West.
Our Constitution cannot survive Soviet-style justice of “Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” Brimelow, Assange, and Durov were targeted for their dissent, and the regime reverse-engineered means to punish them.
A similar process occurs in academia. Last week, the University of Pennsylvania announced that it would sanction law professor Amy Wax, a critic of affirmative action, by suspending her for a year and docking her pay. Penn insisted that the sanctions did not implicate freedom of speech and instead concerned “professionalism” standards for its faculty.
But Wax’s sanctions are explicitly based on 26 incidents of wrongthink, including criticizing “anti-assimilation ideas,” “rap culture,” and cities being “run like third world countries” as well as commenting on differences between the sexes and racial groups.
As the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression explains, “Penn’s willingness to sidestep academic freedom protections to punish Wax sets a troubling precedent. If scholars with controversial views can lose their academic freedom merely for unspecified ‘unprofessionalism’ concerns, all faculty who hold minority, dissenting, or simply unpopular views are at risk.”
Americans more broadly face the same risk. Neither the First Amendment nor abstract free speech principles will stop the censors in their crusade. They will sidestep legal protections of our freedoms under the guise of ostensibly innocuous sloganeering.
Germany is already showing the way, with a guilty verdict for CJ Hopkins, an American living there who objected to Covid controls. With the documents already in place for “the future of the Internet,” the existing administration has a stated aim to close the Internet to free speech and install censors at all levels. This will necessarily run headlong into a confrontation with Elon Musk, but it will eventually hit Rumble and every other alternative source of information.
The target is the First Amendment but with a precise purpose: securing regime control over the whole population, with a public culture wholly controlled in the interests of protecting the administrative state against populist resistance. Those are the stakes.
Let there be no mistake about this. Your freedom to know the truth is what is at issue.
Author
Province introduces civilian oversight of RCMP in Alberta: Committees to oversee RCMP service delivery
Get Ready For Another Mail-In Ballot Fiasco
Trudeau gov’t launches new regulatory agency in case of ‘future pandemics’
It’s not just Springfield, Haitians being flown to small towns nationwide
-
Brownstone Institute2 days agoStudy Confirms the Truth about Masks and Children
-
Business2 days agoSome dockworkers earn more than $400,000 a year
-
illegal immigration1 day agoCartels, UN, and NGOs Fuel U.S. Border Crisis – A Report from Colombia
-
Alberta1 day agoProvince will not allow liquor sales in Alberta grocery and convenience stores
-
Crime2 days agoBukele Defends El Salvador’s Gang Reforms
-
Crime2 days agoEXCLUSIVE: GOP Rep Demands Answers From FBI Over ‘Misguided’ Crime Stats
-
International1 day agoRescue group issues warning to Jews, Americans over potential terrorist threats
-
Economy1 day agoFederal government should listen to Canadians and trim the bureaucracy