Cloaked in secrecy
l3wis 
“I need to work on my DECEPTION acumen a little more.” (Screenshot, KELO-TV video).
I think I.L. Wiederman said it best at this Listening and Learning session with the mayor;
“Why did they say they did fire her? It’s cloaked in secrecy,” I.L. Wiederman said.
Huether did admit he made a mistake, when it came to the process, that is;
“I wish that I would have engaged them more to try to help them understand what we were trying to accomplish in terms of providing dignity, professionalism and safety to the process. But I didn’t do that. That was a mistake; that was a mistake,” Huether said.
But no mention of making a mistake by firing Owen.
UPDATE: Ellis from the Argue Endorser had a good column about the firing today.
The former clerk, Debra Owen, sent councilors an amortization schedule, a forecast showing what the city would pay each year for the next 22 years to pay off the bonds. It showed that in six years, the annual payments would jump to $10 million.
As we all expected, this has to do with the Events Center, but are councilors Erpenbach and Aguliar the ones up in arms about this? Or are they the scapegoats?
You’d think this would be valuable information, right? After all, we’re talking about the biggest single investment the city ever has made. But for her efforts, Owen received at least one phone call from a city councilor who was furious that she had sent out the information.
Unlike the AL, I will tell you who that person (probably) was; Jim Entenman. I’m about 99.5% sure. Just like the mayor, he wants this EC to pass. He has been made the fool on many task forces not getting this done, and I’m sure he flipped a lid when Debra was out spreading the truth before a public vote.
The mayor and councilors say they can’t talk about it because it’s a personnel issue. I have managed to piece it all together, off the record, from several sources. I hope it all becomes public. Let’s put it this way: The people who say they can’t talk because it’s a personnel issue aren’t protecting Owen. They are protecting themselves.
I still haven’t pieced it all together myself, but I think it is unfortunate that the AL wouldn’t just print what Ellis’ educated opinion is on the matter, especially if the proceedings were improper. If it is all true, how could Ellis and the AL be sued for slander?
