More City Approved Slander
So let’s see if we got the story straight: the city manager received an anonymous email claiming that a citizen has violated the law, and then makes it a public document, thereby perpetrating an unsubstantiated accusation by an anonymous source, with no retraction or admonition from the city council. Does this summarize the events correctly?
Try this one on for size city manager: if you become aware of a crime, like when someone like yourself intimidates voters, you are to forward that information immediately to the police department since presumably they have more sense than you and therefore would investigate the matter in a guarded way so as to ensure that the stupid little annoying rule some of us follow called innocent until proven guilty is adhered to.
Questions – that will never be answered:
- Will the city manager under a FOIA request identify the source of original email?
- If the city manager received an identical email, but quoting the voters intimidation section of the Voting Rights Act and a sentence “Bill Moss is in clear violation of the Voting Rights Act”, would the city manager have forwarded that email to the city council, the city attorney, the city clerk and thereby made it public?
- Is the city council going to continue its policy of silence when city employees besmirch and slander the citizens that don’t agree with them?
And some wonder why people are leaving the island.
Here it is - the trail as made public by the city manager:
> >----- Original Message -----
> >Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 8:15 AM
> >Subject: Fwd: FW: Recall Violation!!!!!!!
> >Bill Moss
> >City Manager
> >----- Original Message -----
> > Monday, November 27, 2006 8:13:32 AM
> >-------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
> >From: dedovic <
> >Subject: Recall Violation!!!!!!!
> >Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:51:35 +0000
> >Roger Hall is in clear violation of the state recall statute. I have copied
> >the relevant section from Section 100.361 below.
> >(7) OFFENSES RELATING TO PETITIONS.--No person shall impersonate another,
> >purposely write his or her name or residence falsely in the signing of any
> >petition for recall or forge any name thereto, or sign any paper with
> >knowledge that he or she is not a qualified elector of the municipality. No
> >expenditures for campaigning for or against an officer being recalled shall
> >be made until the date on which the recall election is to be held is
> >publicly announced. The committee and the officer being recalled shall be
> >subject to chapter 106. No person shall employ or pay another to accept
> >employment or payment for circulating or witnessing a recall petition. Any
> >person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be deemed
> >guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree and shall, upon conviction, be
> >punished as provided by law.
> >No date for the election has been announced so it appears that he is in
> >violation of a misdemeanor of the second degree. This appeal for fund
> >raising may conflict with state law prohibiting campaigning (and raising
> >and spending raised money) on a recall campaign. Please make sure this
> >information gets into the hands of councilor Minozzi, Tucker and Trotters