Venezia: Decision not to censure Peotter is bad news for Newport

I’ve covered my share of council meetings, but the one Tuesday night in Newport Beach was a doozy.

If I hadn’t witnessed it, I wouldn’t have believed it. I was embarrassed to be a Newport Beach resident.

I urge every voter in town to watch what unfolded on the city’s website, newportbeachca.swagit.com/play/08112015-934.

In the not-so-distant future, when you’re wondering how the religious right wing took over the city government, it started here.

The issue of the night was whether the City Council would censure Councilman Scott Peotter for his use of the city seal in his now-infamous email, in which he touted his views against the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage and the LGBT use of the rainbow flag, saying it was “God’s symbol that he wouldn’t destroy the world by flood again.... Maybe they are wishful thinking.”

The email used a photographed image of the city seal, giving it the color of authority.

At the meeting, Councilman Keith Curry outlined his opinions as to why Peotter should be censured:

• Peotter illegally used the city seal in seven of his email blasts after being warned not to.

• Peotter’s comments created a potential hostile work environment for gay city employees, which could result in lawsuits putting taxpayers on the hook.

• Peotter had publically apologized at the previous council meeting for disclosing council closed-session information at a recent Newport-Mesa Tea Party meeting, violating state law.

“We cannot tolerate disregard for the law,” Curry said.

Peotter blamed Curry for reigniting the controversy, saying it had died down and that Curry had a political agenda against him.

Peotter barraged City Atty. Aaron Harp with questions about the seal code, saying it was as “clear as mud.”

Harp was no match for Peotter.

Had Newport had a stronger city attorney who would have nipped the seal-usage issue in the bud before the council election, we wouldn’t be in this situation.

Then there were public comments.

Peotter sent an email Monday asking supporters to speak on his behalf, as did the Newport-Mesa Tea Party, which urged members to say, “We support Scott and will not shop in Newport Beach if you pass this censure.”

I knew it would be interesting as folks stepped to the podium.

It was more than that — at times it was downright bizarre.

Comments ranged from lawyers threatening to sue if the censure moved forward, to one characterizing the Supreme Court decisions on abortion and gay marriage as “acts of terrorism.”

There was lots of talk about God and the conservative agenda.

More than a few speakers didn’t even live in Newport.

Of course, there were folks who spoke on behalf of the LGBT community, but they were much less radical than the tea partiers who were out in force for Peotter.

As shocking as some comments were — and again I urge you to view this yourself — I was most disturbed by what Mayor Pro Tem Diane Dixon did next.

Not wanting to support censuring Peotter, she insisted that the council take out key wording in the proposed resolution to soften it.

She insisted that the word “disapprove” be removed and that the council instead “disassociate” itself from Peotter’s email comments. She also demanded that the council take out the wording that he “improperly” used the seal or she wouldn’t vote for it.

In the end, Mayor Ed Selich, Councilman Tony Petros and Curry grudgingly went along with her. Council members Marshall Duffield and Kevin Muldoon voted against it.

Selich says he “clearly wanted a stronger resolution.”

“Last night’s decision is the best that could be achieved with this City Council,” Selich said Wednesday. “I voted for the substitute motion as it was the strongest statement this City Council was willing to make.”

After the meeting, Kevin O’Grady, executive director of the LGBT Center OC, said he was “extremely disappointed by the vote.”

“The council’s vote wasn’t about protecting free speech. It was about political expediency,” he said.

From past interviews with Dixon, it’s clear to me that she wants to be liked. But it’s been my experience that people pleasers never really please anyone in the end. And that’s not what true leadership is about.

As mayor pro tem, she didn’t back up her mayor, and she is likely to be the city’s next mayor.

Though censuring doesn’t have any teeth, per se, it could affect a politician’s future electability.

On Tuesday, Peotter’s “Team Newport” slate mates saved him from the “scarlet letter” of censure.

That’s good news for their tea party friends, who I suspect have big plans for Peotter and, unfortunately, Newport Beach as well.

BARBARA VENEZIA lives in Newport Beach. She can be reached at [email protected].