commentary

In the same issue of the Gazette the Editor opines that the bloggers on this site do not have all the facts of the Rec Director situation, which is true. Few facts, if any, were released and when facts are withheld, people speculate. The best way to dispel any rumors, etc. is to present the facts so the people can decide for themselves. Did the City Manager do due diligence in vetting the new Director, or not? If not, why not? He vouched for the new Rec Director so it is assumed that he checked him out thoroughly and completely. Why would he recommend to the Council somebody who HADNT been checked out comprehensively for " the most important job in the City". Is that a job one would recommend a casual acquaintance for? The standard policy and procedure for hiring any candidate includes a thorough background check, etc., no? Why was this NOT done in THIS case? Could this be a case where the resume AND the background checks were both fabrications, to one extent or another? Is the Mayor and Council aware of these possibilities? Does the Mayor and Council approve of these possible omissions or fabrications, if they occurred? Are they concerned? If not, why not? If so, what are they doing about it? We need to know if the City Manager is doing his job to protect the employees and the residents- or not!