The negative influence of Todd Meier is evident in the 2017 election campaigns.\u00a0 Addison has been subjected to a barrage of false, negative attacks on Joe Chow and others.\u00a0 Meier himself has repeatedly used Addison\u2019s email list to mislead the public regarding the election, most recently by falsely claiming that an issue existed about the eligibility of Joe Chow and Tom Braun.\u00a0 Meier misrepresented the record on this point, including by failing to include the language of the original ballot proposition on term limits, which left no doubt that both Chow and Braun are eligible.<\/p>\n
Meier also concealed the fact that he raised this issue long ago, and that Addison\u2019s attorney had prepared and distributed a lengthy memo confirming the eligibility of both Chow and Braun.\u00a0 That memo included the language of the ballot proposition.\u00a0 So, Meier clearly knew about it.\u00a0 That means its omission was intentional, as was Meier\u2019s intent to deceive.\u00a0 Yet again.<\/p>\n
Meier\u2019s misrepresentations and efforts to impact the election are the latest in a long series of inappropriate actions that have come to define Meier as a person and as a politician.\u00a0 Addison has been significantly harmed.\u00a0 The challenge we now face is moving forward in the wake of Meier\u2019s misguided, destructive tenure.<\/p>\n
I don\u2019t see how the negative campaigning by Meier and his chosen candidates does anything to advance the recovery process.\u00a0 But, these tactics have caused me to reflect on the issues that are at the heart of the damage to Addison.\u00a0 Clearly, we have the opportunity to move in a new direction designed to restore the Addison Way.\u00a0 But first, we have to explore what happened to get us to where we are now.\u00a0 Recognizing the failures of Meier\u2019s deceitful, divisive approach allows us to forge a new, positive path for Addison.<\/p>\n
1. TRUE transparency starts with TRUTH.<\/strong><\/p>\n You cannot have transparency without TRUTH.\u00a0 And the problem with Meier was that he constantly deceived the public.\u00a0 Sure, Meier talked a big game about transparency, but he didn\u2019t \u201cwalk the walk.\u201d\u00a0 To the contrary, Meier went to great lengths to deceive the public, spending inordinate time plotting, scheming, and spinning.\u00a0 Meier concealed unfavorable information, misrepresented facts and, in the end, subjected the public to a constant barrage of misinformation designed to justify Meier\u2019s purpose of the moment.\u00a0 Meier amplified the harm by suppressing other voices, including those of other councilmembers, who he constantly attacked and berated.\u00a0 Sorry, but that\u2019s not transparency.<\/p>\n Meier\u2019s efforts to falsely question the eligibility of Chow and Braun were a classic example of his deceptive and clearly inappropriate conduct.\u00a0 The falsity of Meier\u2019s basic premise that there was a question about eligibility was conclusively disproven by the wording of the ballot proposition by which Addison voters established term limits in 1993:<\/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\u00a0 (Capitalization added).<\/p>\n Clearly, the issue before the voters was limited to the question of consecutive terms, not total terms, and the subsequent change in Addison\u2019s Charter must be viewed in that context.<\/p>\n Meier omitted this important context and misled the public just two days before early voting started.\u00a0 And, there is no dispute that Meier was fully aware of this language and its importance in construing Addison\u2019s Charter, because it was included and discussed in the February 27, 2017 memo prepared by Addison\u2019s attorney, in which she opined that both Chow and Braun were eligible.\u00a0 While Meier could claim that the memo itself was privileged, the fact of the wording of the ballot proposition was not, and Meier\u2019s failure to disclose it confirms his intent to deceive the public.\u00a0 That\u2019s not transparency.<\/p>\n But then, as a lawyer, Meier also knew that even though the lawyer\u2019s memo was subject to the attorney-client privilege, you cannot use that privilege \u201cas a sword and a shield.\u201d\u00a0 That means that you can\u2019t tell half a story and then hide the rest by claiming it is privileged.\u00a0 And Meier did exactly that, in raising the issue without also confirming that he had asked the question months earlier, or that it had been resolved against him by Addison\u2019s attorney.\u00a0 Telling half a story with a clear intent to mislead is not transparency.<\/p>\n But then, consider as well how Meier reacted when other members of the council acted to correct the record.\u00a0 Meier immediately sought to delay the April 28th meeting until the following week.\u00a0 That would have left Meier\u2019s false record before the public (a) until early voting concluded, and (b) until after yet another newsletter from Meier, which undoubtedly would have reiterated the same misinformation.\u00a0 Thankfully, the other members of the council didn\u2019t bite, and held the meeting without Meier.\u00a0 It was a good decision, which was confirmed when Meier was spotted that night at the 7:30 p.m. David Sedaris concert at the Winspear.\u00a0 Putting aside the issue of priorities, Meier clearly could have attended the 5:30 p.m. council meeting and made it to the show with time to spare.\u00a0 In other words, there was no scheduling conflict, and that confirms that Meier\u2019s intent was to keep the truth from the public until after early voting concluded.\u00a0 THAT\u2019S NOT TRANSPARENCY.<\/p>\n The AMLI development was another example of Meier\u2019s tactics.\u00a0 After the AMLI project was approved despite Meier\u2019s efforts to derail its consideration, Meier falsely told residents that the AMLI site was contaminated, ignoring TCEQ\u2019s conclusions to the contrary. Meier then attacked the councilmembers who approved the development.\u00a0 First, Meier inappropriately claimed that AMLI involved a simple yes or no to apartments, when in truth, both AMLI and Addison Grove involved countless other issues.\u00a0 Second, Meier falsely claimed that Councilmembers Duffy, Walden and Angell had campaigned on anti-apartment platforms, which was simply not true.\u00a0 Then, Meier improperly used Addison\u2019s email list to claim that they were not keeping campaign promises, yet another falsity.<\/p>\n I could go on, but let\u2019s leave it at this: Time and again, Meier has misrepresented and mischaracterized issues and events to suit his purposes, including to consolidate his power.\u00a0 In the face of that reality, Meier\u2019s claims about transparency are the biggest lie of all.\u00a0 The fact is that transparency cannot exist without truth, and Meier hasn\u2019t told the truth again and again.\u00a0 Above all, Addison needs a council that tells the truth.<\/p>\n 2. Providing any politician with a monopoly on what citizens hear is dangerous and poor policy.<\/strong><\/p>\n Meier was able to consolidate his power by controlling what Addison residents heard, a monopoly Meier ruthlessly protected.\u00a0 By ensuring that other councilmembers had no equal opportunity to be heard, Meier was free to mischaracterize issues, conceal facts, and mislead residents, influencing public opinion with his propaganda.\u00a0 Meier repeatedly twisted the facts to provide support for his point of view, frequently taking contrary positions as convenient to suit the purpose of the moment.\u00a0 As necessary, things were either \u201calways done this way,\u201d or Addison needed to \u201cembrace change.\u201d\u00a0 Meier used officious buzz words like \u201cbest practices\u201d and \u201ctone at the top\u201d as convenient.\u00a0 They were meaningless in the face of his bullying tactics.\u00a0 The point was never to do what was best for Addison.\u00a0 Rather, Meier\u2019s purpose was always to impose his will on the council.<\/p>\n Meier suppressed discussion and opposing views by making clear to all that he was willing to misquote and attack other councilmembers via Addison\u2019s newsletter and later, by using Addison\u2019s email list.\u00a0 Councilmembers who obeyed Meier were called \u201ccollaborative,\u201d while those who disagreed with or challenged Meier were called \u201cdivisive.\u201d\u00a0 Meier\u2019s attacks made the existence of a deliberative dynamic impossible, and that undermined the seven-member council established by Addison\u2019s Charter.\u00a0 Rather than seeing all this for the very serious problem it was, Meier embraced it because it benefited his quest for absolute power.<\/p>\n Consider the events regarding employee compensation in August\/September 2013.\u00a0 Neil Resnik\u2019s motion on employee compensation passed over Meier\u2019s objection, and despite Meier\u2019s efforts to preclude the council from voting on it.\u00a0 Meier wrote about the meeting in Addison\u2019s newsletter, clearly misrepresenting and mischaracterizing what occurred.\u00a0 Meier used his false narrative to attack Neil Resnik, claiming that Resnik had \u201ccut off discussion.\u201d\u00a0 It was a brazen lie, but by focusing people on his false accusation against Resnik, Meier also avoided scrutiny of his improper effort to prevent the council from voting on Resnik\u2019s motion.\u00a0 Such deflection was a favorite Meier tactic. And, Meier\u2019s lie made people mad at Resnik, which was what Meier wanted.<\/p>\n When Resnik and others challenged Meier on his misuse and abuse of Addison\u2019s newsletter, Meier falsely cast the issue as an effort by his opponents to avoid transparency by terminating what Meier called \u201cthe mayor\u2019s newsletter.\u201d\u00a0 Using that clearly misleading characterization of the issue, Meier inflamed public opinion.\u00a0 Then Meier employed his favored tactic of holding a public hearing.\u00a0 Meier supporters predictably railed on about the need for transparency, while people like me tried to focus the issue back to the law regarding statutorily-defined \u201cpolitical advertising,\u201d which Meier had clearly violated by attacking Resnik.\u00a0 Ultimately, Meier maneuvered the council to allow the newsletter to continue, albeit with review by Addison\u2019s attorney, which proved to be ineffective in preventing Meier from attacking other councilmembers and candidates.<\/p>\n We saw the same nonsense in May 2016, after Meier\u2019s chosen candidates were defeated.\u00a0 Meier immediately set about to undermine the newly elected councilmembers by misleading the public to believe that Councilmembers Duffy, Walden and Angell were trying to terminate Meier\u2019s monopoly on the Town\u2019s newsletter.\u00a0 This episode demonstrates the lengths to which Meier was willing to go to harm his perceived foes.\u00a0 First, Meier put an item on the council\u2019s agenda using this wording: \u201cThe Termination of the Mayor\u2019s Weekly Newsletter.\u201d\u00a0 Second, Meier then set about to mislead the public to believe that it was Duffy, Walden and Angell who had put the item on the agenda.\u00a0 Meier did this by providing the agenda to the facts-don\u2019t-matter tabloid before the agenda was released to the public and, of course, they dutifully wrote: \u201cLong speculated, that if this slate got elected, this would be one of the early things they would address \u2013 not taxes, not economic growth, not anything to positively impact the Town, but rather this negative personal attack.\u201d\u00a0 It was a complete fabrication, and signaled Meier\u2019s intent to spend the ensuing year attacking and undermining the new councilmembers.<\/p>\n There are too many examples of Meier\u2019s deceitful conduct to write about in this piece.\u00a0 Suffice it to say that Meier has amply demonstrated the dangers of propaganda, and the harm that befalls a democracy when it allows one person to control what citizens hear.\u00a0 The lesson for Addison is that no one person should ever be allowed to maintain a monopoly on the information citizens receive from their government.<\/p>\n 3. Transparency requires disclosure of FACTS.\u00a0 But on Meier\u2019s watch, the attorneys were directed to find a way to withhold documents requested under the Open Records Act.\u00a0 THAT\u2019S NOT TRANSPARENCY.<\/strong><\/p>\n The premise of laws like the Open Records Act is that citizens are entitled to receive disclosure of FACTS.\u00a0 This allows citizens to demand accountability, including by drawing their own conclusions about facts and events.\u00a0 Meier turned this model on its head, continually concealing facts and feeding CONCLUSIONS \u2013 Meier\u2019s CONCLUSIONS \u2013 to the public.\u00a0 Sorry, but that isn\u2019t transparency.<\/p>\n Meier also convinced others to assist him in concealing information, most notably the lawyers.\u00a0 I was stunned to learn that on Meier\u2019s watch, Addison\u2019s attorneys were directed to handle Open Records Act requests by finding a way to withhold documents.\u00a0 This inappropriate handling of requests aided Meier\u2019s monopoly on information presented to the public.<\/p>\n Consider here the campaign Meier ran in 2016.\u00a0 Meier used his shill accountant Larry Kanter, who spoke about his two-year-old report, using inappropriate and inflammatory rhetoric to attack Addison\u2019s staff.\u00a0 This provided Meier with the premise of his campaign.\u00a0 The problem for Meier was that Lea Dunn had written a comprehensive memo that refuted Kanter\u2019s claims, and exposed Kanter\u2019s unprofessional and hostile treatment of Addison\u2019s staff.\u00a0 Meier couldn\u2019t afford for that memo to be released, because it would have exposed his campaign for the pack of lies it was.\u00a0 So, Meier orchestrated the concealment of Lea Dunn\u2019s memo, aided by Addison\u2019s lawyers, who repeatedly presented an incomplete and inaccurate record to the Texas Attorney General.<\/p>\n Make no mistake about this: The truth would not have come out had Councilmembers Duffy, Walden and Angell not been elected.\u00a0 They were the ones who pressed for the release of Lea Dunn\u2019s memo, which exposed Meier\u2019s lies.\u00a0 And, having now studied Lea Dunn\u2019s memo in detail, I can assure you that there is no part of that document that is even arguably subject to the attorney-client privilege.\u00a0 And yet, Addison\u2019s lawyers asserted that privilege and thereby aided Meier in deceiving Addison, all in an effort to influence the 2016 election.<\/p>\n Thankfully, with the guidance of the new council in 2016, Wes Pierson has reversed course, and Open Records Act requests are now reviewed with a philosophy and policy of disclosure.\u00a0 Among other things, I\u2019m sure Addison is saving thousands of dollars in attorney\u2019s fees that were unnecessarily incurred in connection with Meier\u2019s efforts to conceal information.<\/p>\n Addison must forcefully reject the atmosphere of secrecy and concealment that existed on Meier\u2019s watch and return to the open government mandated by the Open Records Act.\u00a0 Citizens have a right to know the facts and the truth, and we must demand disclosure of both from our government.<\/p>\n 4. Paper and other \u201cbusy work\u201d doesn\u2019t solve the problem.<\/strong><\/p>\n Addison is learning hard lessons about the proverbial lowest common denominator.\u00a0 Meier\u2019s bad behavior has demonstrated the damage one lawless, brazen person can cause.\u00a0 Addison has to address the proverbial \u201celephant in the room,\u201d which is that Addison\u2019s problems are with Meier, not with the presence or absence of yet more policies and procedures.\u00a0 Simply stated, all the paper in the world doesn\u2019t matter when someone like Meier is willing and able to deceive and conceal the facts from the public.<\/p>\n First, let\u2019s address the \u201cbusy work\u201d issue.\u00a0 Meier put on a grand show during his six years, holding countless meetings and purporting to establish important policies.\u00a0 It was inefficient and often pointless, and the results were sometimes not worth the paper they were written on.<\/p>\n Consider here the issue of the Open Records Act.\u00a0 This is a Texas statute.\u00a0 Addison is bound by it.\u00a0 So, Addison doesn\u2019t need to promulgate a policy that says it will comply with the Open Records Act, because that is a fact of life for Addison.\u00a0 As well, the mere existence of a document titled Open Records Act Policy doesn\u2019t establish compliance.\u00a0 And yet, that is what Meier did: he touted Addison\u2019s Open Records Act Policy as supposed proof of his transparency.\u00a0 It was nothing but more smoke and mirrors from Meier.<\/p>\n To start, the so-called \u201cpolicy\u201d was a lengthy, poorly drafted document that contained lots about procedures, but almost nothing about policy.\u00a0 In reality, it was another example of Meier\u2019s efforts to micromanage the staff, which is not the job of the council, and is certainly not the job of the mayor.\u00a0 But it didn\u2019t add anything to the already existing obligation on Addison\u2019s part to comply with the Open Records Act.\u00a0 It was all for show.<\/p>\n And here\u2019s the problem.\u00a0 Addison\u2019s real policy on Meier\u2019s watch was one of evasion and obstruction.\u00a0 The lawyers were directed to find a way to withhold requested, responsive documents.\u00a0 So, the so-called policy wasn\u2019t even accurate in describing what Addison was really doing.\u00a0 It was a false, misleading document that concealed the truth about Addison\u2019s obstruction and evasion of Open Records Act requests.<\/p>\n Of course, none of it mattered, because we\u2019ve already documented Meier\u2019s willingness to conceal responsive information and, sadly, the lawyers\u2019 willingness to aid and abet that conduct.\u00a0 The improper withholding of Lea Dunn\u2019s key memo was evidence enough of that.<\/p>\n With this context in mind, you can see that Meier\u2019s recent push for more policies regarding transparency, ethics and council decorum was just more of the same misdirection and subterfuge.\u00a0 That is confirmed when you consider that it only came up after Meier\u2019s shameful and unprofessional handling of the AMLI meeting.\u00a0 Meier hoped to avoid accountability for his bad behavior by claiming he was victimized by interruptions from other councilmembers, and that some review of Addison\u2019s procedures was therefore necessary.\u00a0 It was classic Meier deflection, and we saw more of it when he attacked the councilmembers for meeting on April 28, 2017, to set the record straight before early voting concluded, despite Meier\u2019s efforts to delay their important corrective action.<\/p>\n Addison has to understand that more procedures and paper and policies and procedures are meaningless in the fact of a dishonest politician like Meier.\u00a0 Whether Meier disregarded one law or ten or a hundred laws is irrelevant to the question of whether he was lawless.<\/p>\n Without an honest council, policies aren\u2019t worth the paper they\u2019re printed on.<\/p>\n 5. The council needs to have real MEETINGS, not one-sided prosecutorial presentations.\u00a0 Council meetings cannot ever be about one person.<\/strong><\/p>\n Addison\u2019s charter establishes a council of SEVEN, not one.\u00a0 The idea is for seven people to confer, discuss and deliberate, working together for the common good of Addison.\u00a0 Meier turned it all on its head, showing no interest in the opinions of others unless, of course, they were of benefit to whatever Meier was doing at any given time.\u00a0 Meier dominated discussions, frequently making motions before councilmembers could even address the issue.\u00a0 When the other councilmembers were finally recognized, Meier debated them individually, rather than allowing a discussion amongst the council as a whole.<\/p>\n When Meier opposed a measure, he filibustered or sought to table the matter in order to prevent council action.\u00a0 Meier used these tactics in an effort to prevent Lea Dunn from being appointed as Addison\u2019s city manager.\u00a0 Meier even worked with Blake Clemens to derail a meeting after more than three hours, claiming that it hadn\u2019t been properly noticed.\u00a0 Of course, this was only done after Meier\u2019s motion for a nationwide search failed, and literally as Chris DeFrancisco was making a motion to appoint Lea Dunn to succeed Ron Whitehead as Addison\u2019s city manager.<\/p>\n The most glaring example of Meier\u2019s misconduct was the February 14, 2017 meeting in connection with the AMLI project.\u00a0 Meier repeatedly tried to table the matter or take up other business in an effort to prevent the council from voting.\u00a0 Meier refused to recognize Bruce Arfsten\u2019s attempt to make a motion, and precluded other councilmembers from participating in the discussion.\u00a0 Meier actively prevented the council from deliberating or discussing the matter, or from informing the public regarding their views of the project.<\/p>\n The challenge for the new council is to ensure an orderly conduct of council business.\u00a0 That involves balancing everyone\u2019s right to participate with a clear need to achieve greater efficiency.\u00a0 It also means embracing differences in approach and opinions, which in turn requires councilmembers to commit themselves to a healthy deliberative dynamic.\u00a0 All of which means that we as voters must populate the council with people willing to embrace these principles, rather than people like Meier, whose priority was to impose his will on the council and the Town, rather than searching for what was best for Addison.<\/p>\n 6. \u201cMeeting\u201d people to death doesn\u2019t provide transparency, and is yet another sign of an unhealthy government.<\/strong><\/p>\n Meier has held more meetings than any other mayor I\u2019ve seen.\u00a0 But, it\u2019s all show and no go.\u00a0 Items are buried in a labyrinth of committees and procedures and more meetings.\u00a0 It has been horribly and needlessly inefficient.\u00a0 Then, when the meetings do happen, Meier talks endlessly and unnecessarily, often as a tactic designed to stall and otherwise affect the result.\u00a0 Meier constantly plays to the cameras, injecting drama and feigning a variety of reactions in what is clearly Oscar-worthy acting. Stated simply, Meier enjoys occupying the \u201cthrone.\u201d<\/p>\n All these unnecessary, lengthy meetings are harmful to Addison.\u00a0 There is literal expense, as Town Hall is populated for hundreds of additional hours, with staff required to be in attendance.\u00a0 There is human expense, as staff is kept at Meier\u2019s meetings until all hours of the night, taking time away from actually conducting the work of the Town.\u00a0 And that\u2019s before you even consider the human toll on the lives of our staff.\u00a0 It\u2019s no coincidence that on Meier\u2019s watch we\u2019ve had FOUR city managers and have lost every department head except two.\u00a0 At his hand, we\u2019ve also lost significant talent and hundreds of hours of municipal experience with the exodus of management and staff seeking to escape the toxic environment Meier has created.\u00a0 The excruciating, endless meetings are a factor in that equation.<\/p>\n Many of us who have served on the council have been appalled at the number and length of Meier\u2019s meetings.\u00a0 The irony is that despite their length, Meier\u2019s meetings do little to bring out the opinions of other councilmembers and, as previously discussed, Meier regularly conceals information and misinforms the public.\u00a0 Meier\u2019s tenure has proven that transparency is not about quantity.\u00a0 It is about quality, and Meier has provided little quality despite setting records for the number and length of meetings.<\/p>\n All the meetings have also had a chilling effect on those willing to run for council.\u00a0 Many fine candidates have undoubtedly concluded that they just don\u2019t have the time to work a full-time job and also sit at meetings until midnight and one o\u2019clock in the morning.\u00a0 That is particularly true given how much time Meier wastes and how Meier uses time as a weapon, wearing others down in an effort to bend them to his imperialistic will.\u00a0 Being on Addison\u2019s council is not a full-time job.\u00a0 But Meier has made it so.\u00a0 It\u2019s no coincidence that most of the current council does not have full-time employment.\u00a0 Meier has inappropriately reduced the potential pool of candidates, and that is not healthy for Addison.<\/p>\n The number and length of meetings held by Meier illustrates another important problem, and that is Meier\u2019s micromanagement of Addison\u2019s staff.\u00a0 The role of council is to set policy and then get out of the way.\u00a0 The professional staff, not Meier and the council, are tasked with conducting the business of the Town.\u00a0 In the name of \u201cstudying\u201d this, that and the other thing, Meier and his cadre have, in actuality, been directing the staff at too specific a level.\u00a0 It\u2019s time for the council to get back to its real job, which is to set policy and priorities. The city manager is tasked with the responsibility for making the actual work happen.\u00a0 And the council (including the mayor) must get out of the way and let the staff do its job.<\/p>\n Which is another way of saying that Meier has been unwilling to accept the fact that our Charter establishes a city manager\/council form of government.<\/p>\n Addison needs to get back to the form of government our Charter envisions.\u00a0 Doing so will eliminate many unnecessary meetings.\u00a0 And, it will prevent any future mayor from using meetings and time to bludgeon others on the council.\u00a0 Hopefully, it will also encourage others to run for council.<\/p>\n 7. Treating applicants and business owners respectfully is good business, it\u2019s NOT \u201cFeeling Sorry\u201d for them.<\/strong><\/p>\n I was fascinated to watch the recent candidate forum, at which some of Meier\u2019s chosen candidates adopted Meier\u2019s rhetoric, wherein he claimed that councilmembers voted for the AMLI development because they \u201cfelt sorry\u201d for AMLI.\u00a0 You heard the same nonsense at the Town Hall meeting when a Meier supporter read Meier\u2019s planted question on the AMLI development. Good for Ivan Hughes that he hit the planted question head-on, eloquently describing why he voted in favor of AMLI.\u00a0 It had nothing to do with \u201cfeeling sorry\u201d for anyone, but dealt with important issues relating to the health of Addison Circle and its environs.\u00a0 Give me a break: no one on the council voted for AMLI because they \u201cfelt sorry\u201d for AMLI. What utter nonsense.<\/p>\n But back to the forum.\u00a0 What I found fascinating was that the same candidates who pledged to take hardline positions respecting business developments also pledged to embrace economic development.\u00a0 Huh?<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the thing.\u00a0 The Addison business community is vital to the health of the Addison residential community.\u00a0 It is foolish to think that we can survive with the amenities we have traditionally enjoyed in Addison, while treating businesses and applicants as Meier treated the AMLI representatives on February 14, 2017.\u00a0 We need businesses in Addison, and we need to continue to develop the business community.\u00a0 The challenge for the council is to balance their economic development work with the interests of the residents.\u00a0 And to do so politely and respectfully.\u00a0 That isn\u2019t about \u201cfeeling sorry\u201d for anyone.\u00a0 It\u2019s about being smart and doing what is in Addison\u2019s best interests.<\/p>\n The truth is that Meier\u2019s conduct at the AMLI meeting and thereafter in attacking AMLI sent a very bad message to the business community and potential applicants.\u00a0 Among other things, Meier made clear that if they didn\u2019t have his singular approval, he would attack them at the meeting and after the meeting.\u00a0 No matter what the council decided.\u00a0 Without regard to approval of their projects.\u00a0 We are fools if we don\u2019t recognize that the business community has been watching the Meier gong show, and other nearby communities are capitalizing on the instability that Meier has brought with his imperialistic approach.<\/p>\n So, we must recognize moving forward that we need a healthy Addison business community, and that we can achieve a good balance between their needs and the needs of residents.\u00a0 But we can\u2019t do it if we continue to subject businesses and applicants to Meier\u2019s \u201cmy way or the highway\u201d approach.\u00a0 All of this is common sense and has nothing to do with \u201cfeeling sorry\u201d for anyone.<\/p>\n CONCLUSION<\/strong><\/p>\n I hope I\u2019ve convinced you that it\u2019s time for Addison to engage in some significant soul-searching and self-reflection.\u00a0 The issues I\u2019ve outlined in this article are important considerations that in my view will help Addison find its way back to the Addison Way.<\/p>\n