It has often been confusing to me over the last couple of election cycles sitting councilors have been hosting public fundraisers for challengers to incumbent councilors. I can understand that you may not like the incumbent you serve with and you certainly have a 1st Amendment right to speak publicly about it and even donate money to their opponent. But you do have to question the integrity and ethics of these councilors who will openly HOST a fundraiser that is challenging the incumbent, and using their official titles as councilors on the media promoting the event.
The irony is the incumbent is probably one of the most qualified city councilors we have ever had, working several years in the law offices of city hall. You also have to factor in their dedication towards open government and transparency. But what makes the other councilors (and three of the Mayor’s campaign GOONS, with a sprinkling of bankers, bonders and trusters) support of this candidate puzzling to me is that the incumbent has always been in lock step with the rest of the council on most issues, especially when it comes to development and growth.
So while she may still make it into the rubber stamp club on occasion, I think her questioning of the administration and especially their confused and inept legal counsel, it disqualifies you from the club, so they need a new member; A physician that has ZERO experience when it comes to planning, litigation and long term strategic planning. A perfect fit for the rubber stampers.