I am appalled by how my son, Fircrest City Councilman Matthew Jolibois, was treated at the Tuesday council meeting due to a matter between him and the Fircrest city manager (TNT, 8-31)
Councilman Hunter George walked-on a motion at the meeting that stated council would sign a letter (Viewpoint, 9-12) to be sent to the newspaper that Matthew should not have put the city in a bad light because of conflicts over Masko Park.
By the way, I was told that “walk-on” means the public had no knowledge the motion was going to be on the agenda.
Here is the worse part: During the meeting my son was at a local hospital with his 82- year-old father, who was hospitalized because of bleeding in his brain. George stated at the meeting that he called Matthew to let him know about the motion and that he felt bad about what was happening to his father.
Matthew’s brother asked to speak at the meeting before he went to the hospital to explain that their father’s health had gotten worse; he asked if the council would delay its motion so Matthew could be there to defend himself.
While Councilmembers Gruver, McVay, Viafore and Waltier made comments accusing Matthew of embarrassing the city and that he was above the law, Matthew was unable to tell his side of the story. Why couldn’t the council wait a couple weeks to consider George’s motion so Matthew could be there so council members and the city manager could make comments to his face? What was the rush?