{"id":1619,"date":"2017-04-29T18:50:33","date_gmt":"2017-04-29T23:50:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/truthinaddison.com\/?page_id=1619"},"modified":"2017-04-29T19:05:43","modified_gmt":"2017-04-30T00:05:43","slug":"1619-2","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/truthinaddison.com\/?page_id=1619","title":{"rendered":"Joe Chow and Tom Braun Are Eligible, Meier Knew It, And BRAZENLY DECEIVED Addison Voters About It"},"content":{"rendered":"

Joe Chow and Tom Braun Are Eligible, Meier Knew It, And <\/strong><\/h3>\n

BRAZENLY DECEIVED Addison Voters About It <\/strong>
\nBy Susan M. Halpern<\/strong>
\nFormer Addison Councilmember (1992-1999)<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Joe Chow and Tom Braun are eligible to run for mayor and council. The information released last evening by the city council confirms that there is no legitimate argument to be made to the contrary.<\/p>\n

As it turns out, the issue of eligibility was raised months ago, likely by Todd Meier. And, Addison\u2019s attorney, Brenda McDonald, RESOLVED THE ISSUE MONTHS AGO, in a detailed memo that Meier and the council received on February 27, 2017.\u00a0 McDonald concluded that both Chow and Braun were eligible.<\/p>\n

All of which means that when Meier published last week\u2019s newsletter, he was in possession of an attorney\u2019s opinion and additional information that he intentionally WITHHELD from Addison voters in a clear effort to dissuade them from voting for Chow and Braun. <\/strong><\/p>\n

By last Saturday, Meier had been in possession of the referenced information for almost NINE WEEKS. During that time, Meier did not publicly raise the issue of the eligibility of Chow and Braun.\u00a0 Instead, Meier waited until the Saturday before early voting began to tell Addison voters half a story in a clear effort to mislead them.\u00a0 Meier knew that by waiting until the eleventh hour, it would be impossible for the other members of the council to correct the record before early voting started.\u00a0 After all, any meeting to address the issue would require at least 72 hours\u2019 notice.\u00a0 So, Meier knew that even if they tried, his ruse would influence voters for at least a few days.<\/p>\n

When it became clear that at least four councilmembers intended to act to correct the record and provide TRUTH to Addison\u2019s voters, Meier tried to delay them. Meier claimed that he had a scheduling conflict, and tried to delay the council\u2019s corrective action until next week.\u00a0 Or in other words, until after early voting was concluded.\u00a0 More about Meier\u2019s \u201cscheduling conflict\u201d later.<\/p>\n

The depth of Meier\u2019s deceit and his intent to harm the efforts of Chow and Braun to serve Addison cannot be overstated. This is a sitting mayor who acted with clear intent to influence an election by lying to the electorate.\u00a0 Meier\u2019s conduct was unethical and inexcusable.\u00a0 Let\u2019s talk about it.<\/p>\n

1. Addison residents voted for term limits in 1993. The wording of the ballot proposition leaves NO doubt about what was intended.<\/strong><\/b><\/p>\n

The language of the 1993 ballot proposition is the key:<\/p>\n

\u201cSHALL THE ADDISON CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO LIMIT TO THREE (3) THE NUMBER OF CONSECUTIVE TERMS which a person may hold the office of Mayor or the office of council member, and to effectuate such amendment.\u201d (Capitalization added).<\/p>\n

Note that the question was about the \u201cnumber of consecutive terms,\u201d not the \u201cnumber of terms\u201d or the \u201cnumber of total terms.\u201d The wording of the proposition, with \u201cconsecutive\u201d modifying \u201cterms\u201d leaves no doubt whatsoever about what was intended.\u00a0 The question was only about \u201cconsecutive\u201d terms.\u00a0 By way of example it precluded four \u201cconsecutive\u201d terms, but not four or more terms that were not \u201cconsecutive.\u201d<\/p>\n

The measure passed, and on that basis, the Charter was amended with this language:<\/p>\n

\u201cNo person shall serve as Mayor for more than three (3) successive terms of office, and no person shall serve as a council member for more than three (3) successive terms of office. For purposes of this section, the phrase \u201cterms of office\u201d shall not include any unexpired portion of any two-year term.\u201d<\/p>\n

In my view, this language is very clear. But, even if you disagree, the language of the ballot proposition resolves all doubt.<\/p>\n

2. Meier concealed the ballot proposition, the involvement of Addison\u2019s attorney, and her memo concluding that Chow and Braun were eligible.<\/strong><\/b><\/p>\n

Let\u2019s parse Meier\u2019s presentation of the issue, and I think you\u2019ll agree with my conclusions about Meier\u2019s nefarious intent.<\/p>\n

First, Meier didn\u2019t include the 1993 ballot proposition in last week\u2019s newsletter, nor did he disclose the fact that the issue had been posed to Addison\u2019s attorney, or that more than nine weeks prior to his newsletter\u2019s publication, the attorney had issued a detailed opinion confirming that Chow and Braun were eligible. Meier had all of it long ago, and he certainly had all of it when he published his misleading newsletter last Saturday.\u00a0 After all, as noted above, Attorney Brenda McDonald\u2019s lengthy memo was dated February 27, 2017, almost ten weeks ago.\u00a0 And, that memo included the wording of the 1993 ballot proposition as a part of her legal analysis.<\/p>\n

So, if Meier had really intended to inform the public or answer a question, he would not have concealed this critical information. Which confirms that Meier\u2019s real purpose was not to inform.\u00a0 Rather, Meier\u2019s purpose was to mislead, and to influence the election by presenting a false record to Addison voters.<\/p>\n

Second, Meier introduced the subject of eligibility as if it had been a burning question in the minds of countless voters, and that this is what caused him to research it. The information released last evening confirms that this is false.\u00a0 What we now know is that the issue of the eligibility of Chow and Braun was raised \u2013 undoubtedly by Meier \u2013 more than ten weeks ago.\u00a0 That confirms that none of this was \u201crecent\u201d research by Meier based on \u201crecent\u201d questions posed to Meier.\u00a0 It is now clear that Meier long ago hatched a plan to harm Chow and Braun by misinforming Addison voters on the eve of early voting.<\/p>\n

Third, think about the detailed nature of Meier\u2019s newsletter on the issue of eligibility. Meier provided a seemingly exhaustive narrative of \u201call\u201d that he claimed to have done to resolve this supposedly new issue.\u00a0 Meier included numbered paragraphs and discussions of the Charter language and even a reference to an interview with the last Charter Review Chair.\u00a0 It seemed comprehensive, didn\u2019t it? \u00a0Meier clearly wanted the reader to believe that Meier\u2019s recitation was complete, and that he had left no stone unturned.\u00a0 And that was patently false.<\/p>\n

Meier used a classic technique of deception. It relies on the premise that the more detailed a person is in describing events, the more inclined we are to give credence to what they are saying.\u00a0 So, Meier carefully crafted his faux answer to lead the reader to conclude that he had looked everywhere for an answer, and that he was thoroughly recounting all information he had discovered.\u00a0 Meier went so far as to write: \u201cI checked out our history,\u201d even as he intentionally concealed the wording of the 1993 ballot proposition and the February 27, 2017 McDonald Memo, all of which unequivocally established the eligibility of Chow and Braun.<\/p>\n

No one reading Meier\u2019s lengthy recitation would have thought that he was withholding key evidence. Nor would anyone have realized that this issue was raised months ago, and resolved<\/em> months ago.\u00a0 All of which confirms that Meier\u2019s clear intent was to deceive Addison voters, and to persuade them \u201cdetermine\u201d the issue \u201cat the polls\u201d by not voting for Chow and Braun.<\/p>\n

3. Meier\u2019s efforts to delay the council\u2019s corrective action and the falsity of further spin.<\/strong><\/b><\/p>\n

Let\u2019s be clear about what happened last night. The council \u2013 without Meier\u2019s cooperation or presence \u2013 acted to correct the false record Meier placed before Addison voters last Saturday.\u00a0 The council disclosed THE TRUTH and thereby disclosed the FALSITY of Meier\u2019s narrative.<\/p>\n

IN OTHER WORDS, LAST NIGHT\u2019S MEETING WAS A VICTORY FOR TRANSPARENCY. <\/strong><\/p>\n

But Meier never admits the truth, and so he acted to avoid it and is now acting to spin the situation so as to avoid responsibility for his lies. It started with Meier\u2019s efforts to delay corrective action by the council.\u00a0 Meier claimed to be unavailable last night, using a supposed scheduling conflict to urge the council to delay the meeting until next week.\u00a0 Had the council agreed to do that, Meier\u2019s misleading claims would have remained uncorrected until early voting was concluded, which was clearly Meier\u2019s intent.\u00a0 That tells you that Meier has no remorse for his wrongful conduct, including because he worked to perpetuate the harm he caused.<\/p>\n

That brings us to Meier\u2019s supposed \u201cscheduling conflict.\u201d You would hope that it was something important and serious, because correcting Meier\u2019s efforts to improperly influence the election with false information was surely important and serious.<\/p>\n

So what was the big scheduling conflict? Where was Meier last night?\u00a0 Well, as luck would have it, an Addison resident spotted Meier at the Winspear, attending a show by comedian David Sedaris that wasn\u2019t even scheduled to start until 7:30 p.m.\u00a0 That\u2019s right, Meier went to see a comedian, as Addison\u2019s council was meeting to release information that corrected Meier\u2019s improper attempts to influence the election.<\/p>\n

And here\u2019s the thing. Meier could easily have attended a 5:30 council meeting and made it to the Winspear before 7:30 p.m., with time to spare.\u00a0 And that tells us that it wasn\u2019t a scheduling conflict at all.\u00a0 The truth is that Meier tried to delay the council\u2019s corrective action by claiming<\/em> to have a scheduling conflict.\u00a0 When it didn\u2019t work, Meier was boxed in.\u00a0 If he showed up at the meeting, the falsity of his claimed scheduling conflict would have been exposed.\u00a0 It would have been clear to all that he had lied about his schedule in an effort to keep the inaccurate record before the voters until early voting ended.\u00a0 So, Meier had to avoid the meeting last night.<\/p>\n

And the spin continued today. In his latest newsletter, Meier attacked the \u201cunnamed\u201d councilmembers who called for the meeting last evening (Arfsten, Duffy, Angell, Walden, Hughes, hardly \u201cunnamed\u201d) for calling the meeting \u201cwithout consideration of [his] schedule,\u201d accusing them of being \u201cincredibly disrespectful.\u201d And in what might be called a Freudian slip, Meier called the setting of last evening\u2019s critical meeting as a \u201clow point.\u201d\u00a0 Well, for Meier it probably was a low point, having been caught red-handed trying to defraud Addison voters. \u00a0You have to wonder, where is Meier\u2019s contrition?\u00a0 Does the man have no conscience at all?\u00a0 Where is his apology for lying to Addison voters?<\/p>\n

In the end, the council did the right thing in refusing to acquiesce in Meier\u2019s clearly spurious efforts to delay the meeting. And that led to a great meeting that was truly about TRANSPARENCY.\u00a0 The truth came out, despite Meier\u2019s efforts to conceal it.\u00a0 It was a sign of a new day in Addison.\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

4. Jumping on the bandwagon.\u00a0<\/strong><\/b>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the ultimate spin, and with full knowledge that the votes were there to reveal the TRUTH, Meier jumped right on the bandwagon. He\u2019s done this many times before.\u00a0 On this issue, now that it\u2019s all out there, Meier claims he supported the council\u2019s action and sent his \u201crecommendation\u201d to release the attorney\u2019s memos.\u00a0 It\u2019s hogwash.\u00a0 Had Meier believed in the truth, he would never have lied in the first place.\u00a0 His conduct in supposedly supporting disclosure came only when disclosure was inevitable.<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t be fooled. Meier lied to the electorate, presenting a false record to influence voters against Joe Chow and Tom Braun.\u00a0 There is no spin that changes the inexcusable, wrongful nature of Meier\u2019s conduct.<\/p>\n

5. Meier\u2019s candidates hope to gain through Meier\u2019s misrepresentations.\u00a0<\/strong><\/b>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

I have yet to see any of Meier\u2019s candidates condemn the vicious, deceptive tactics that have been used by Meier and others in this campaign. Not once.\u00a0 Ever.\u00a0 They clearly endorse such tactics and unquestionably hope to benefit.\u00a0 That is shameful, but it is also quite revealing.\u00a0 Make no mistake about it: those who endorse such tactics will do the same thing if elected.<\/p>\n

6. Conclusion.\u00a0<\/strong><\/b><\/p>\n

It is time for Addison to reject Meier\u2019s politics of deceit and division.\u00a0 I am hopeful that the electorate will see the merit in what the council did last evening, and will help Addison turn the page and begin its journey back to the Addison Way.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n