Clerk’s guilt, to Tari it’s a joke

By:  Diane Benjamin

Tari pretended he didn’t know what language was missing from the oath of office he took May 1st.  Funny since he supposedly took the correct vote before Monday’s meetings.  Did he not understand why he was given a new oath, or maybe he didn’t take it?  Nice try Mayor.  Just hit Play!

I wonder if the entire Council understands the “Welcoming Ordinance” they will discuss next Monday violates the correct oath?  Expect tears when they find out that governing isn’t about feelings, it’s about laws.

Public comment only had 3 people last night, 2 mentioned me.  To hear all 3 start at 9:40.  The first lady promoted immigrants, she didn’t say if the ones she supports are legal or illegal.  The other 2 were probably speaking for many of you.  Click on CC and the bottom of the video to read the words instead of using the sound.

 

.
.
.

 

Advertisements

Comments

  1. the first speaking lady was right in her comments , but there are however’s ,, it changes when you are talking about legal vs illegal . some illegal folk are undocumented and sometimes a risk . to top that risk , under the mask of sanctuary they are reinforced . . we talk about accountability , then pass things that erode accountability . time to put our big boy pants on and think about things .

    Like

  2. Conscience says:

    Do you support violating the 4th amendment to further red meat politics? To say a Welcoming City ordinance violates the constitution is right-wing boilerplate.

    Like

  3. Elizabeth Gruber says:

    As I mentioned, I welcome legal vetted immigrants but you are right I do not support open borders and sanctuary cities. When did illegals become more important than taxpayers? Let me see that proposed Ordinance and I can give a better opinion. Tell me how a Welcoming Ordinance and making signs will improve the status of local taxpayers?

    Like

  4. Literally a clerical error. And they’ve retaken the oath. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill.

    Like

  5. Beth Whissman’s reactions are fun to read too. Lots of eye rolling during public comment.

    Like

  6. NOW IT’S A CLERICAL ERROR? I thought the City Attorney first said they used some old cards. Why would old cards have that language on them when that language never existed for the pledge in the first place? Are they confused as to the reasons why? Who was present when they allegedly took their correct oaths Monday night, Was it video taped? What is their reason for not doing the swearing in at the Council Meeting? It all looks dirty and suspicious. The new Council started talking about the Welcoming Ordinance just after the election last spring, and based upon their words and actions, Im certain the monkeying around with the OATH OF Office was done on purpose.I want to to see proof the retook they retook the oath. THEIR WORD IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

. .

wordpress stats plugin
%d bloggers like this: