A COMPANY MAN

January 27 letter from Donna M. to Blaine City Councilman Isaac Newland:

Council member Newland, 

 

I did not know who you were before you entered Blaine politics. That gave you an opportunity most people do not get: a clean slate. 

The first time I noticed you was the night a convicted violent felon publicly threatened to murder four citizens. I watched the video carefully. You did not clap. When I later saw you at a council meeting, I recognized you and introduced myself and congratulated you for that. I meant it. 

Last night made it clear that my initial assessment was wrong. 

With Mayor Mary Lou Steward recused from the Avista vote, you were given your first real taste of power in Blaine politics. From the citizens’ perspective, you failed—miserably. 

Let’s review what you presided over. 

The city attorney, Peter Ruffatto, invited comments on whether any council members should be excluded from participating in the vote. A citizen raised a legitimate concern about Council member Jiggy Sorrell—specifically, that he applauded the death threat captured on video and later reinforced that conduct online. 

After a brief recess, council returned and announced that it was “fine” for Mr. Sorrell to vote. 

At that point, I attempted to disclose additional, directly relevant information: that Mr. Sorrell has demonstrated animus toward critics of the Avista project, including by reaching out on social media to my daughter—the adult child of one of those critics. That conduct alone raises serious ethical concerns. Just to be clear, statements about bias, animus, conflicts or recusal are explicitly relevant before such a huge vote. 

Your response was not to listen.
Your response was to silence. 

You instructed that I should not be making comments and ordered me removed from chambers. When I asked, “For what—free speech?” there was no answer. 

Moments later, an elderly man—who made the effort to come to City Hall—stood to speak. You told him he could not comment because he was “not involved” in the Avista process. He spoke anyway, delivering a pointed metaphor about Blaine citizens being expected to “hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil,” complete with gestures. Bravo to this man's courage.

You did not threaten removal. 

You knew his name. You let him speak. Then you moved on. 

That contrast is the point. 

What you and the city attorney witnessed that night was not order. It was viewpoint-specific discrimination, plain and simple. Add it to the growing record. 

One additional note, since you are now acting mayor pro tem: if you aspire to leadership, it is troubling that you had to ask what ex parte communications are while presiding over a quasi-judicial matter. That is basic homework. Authority without preparation is not leadership. 

Lastly, if you want to distinguish yourself from what many citizens increasingly recognize as the “Mary Lou regime,” here is some unsolicited advice: stop reflexively silencing critics. Try extending an olive branch. Try listening. Or better yet, maybe make a difference for us. Remember a few weeks ago when I asked you, "Were you aware that the death threat is online?" You said, "Yes, I am aware...I don't really want to comment." I then responded, "So, you don't care about the lives of people who have been threatened with murder? You think the city should still put them online? You: Silence. Silence may be convenient in the moment, but it permanently aligns you with the harm you chose not to confront. It looks like you are going to fit in well as a company man, Newland.

Alas, the big revelation from last night is that you may not value what we have to say—but others do. Increasingly so. 

Update:

106 Days of Living Under A Death Threat 

715 Days of NO oral public comment at city council meetings