Apology from a Stone?

Sam Killay
Claremont
To the editor,

On Dec. 18, Claremont City Councilor Jon Stone doxed me and my wife. He first promoted and then participated in harassment. His ill will (and thus his malicious intent) in the Facebook post was evident as he attempted to slur me in multiple ways. This is all (very) public knowledge. And yes, I have screenshots to back up all of this.

On Jan. 9, Stone was called upon to resign. At this point, it doesn’t appear that he will. Nor has he apologized, either in public or in private. The city’s response has been wholly inadequate. Its only official response so far has been a wishy-washy statement about updating its social media policy — which, to my mind, is missing the point spectacularly. The problems here are doxing and harassment of citizens, not social media.

I’m not going to mince words: doxing and harassment can both be criminal — and the context of Mr Stone’s post casts him in a very unfavorable light. If I could possibly be pressing charges right now, then you’ll forgive my feeling that the city should be doing a lot more, here.

I’d like to share some language from the city’s Code of Conduct. This is the first stipulation for Board Members. “Board Members must take all reasonable steps to instill confidence in the general public that their votes and/or decisions are unbiased and are based solely upon merits of the matter and the materials and/or evidence presented.” 

By that measure alone, Mr. Stone’s treatment of my family should be disqualifying. But wait, there’s more! Here is the Violations section of the Code of Conduct. As you read it, please evaluate the councilman’s behavior in light of these words.

“Violations of this policy undermine the confidence that the general public has in the City government. The City must operate effectively and efficiently, so that we will encourage individuals and businesses to become, or remain, a part of the community. Accordingly, all City Employees and Board Members must avoid circumstance that damage public confidence. Violations of this policy that occur under circumstances where the City Employee or Board Member knew, or should have known, that the conduct in question violated this Code of Conduct, must have strong consequences. Accordingly, violations of this policy may subject the City Employee or Board Member to sanctions, which may include, but are not limited to, written or oral warnings, suspension, immediate termination of employment, removal from office, official censure or reprimand, or forfeiture of elected seat. This policy shall be enforced by a Court of competent jurisdiction with regard to members of the City Council or other elected officials; by the City Council as it pertains to individuals appointed to various Boards, Commissions, or Committees thereby; and by the City Manager with regard to City employees, and individuals appointed to various Boards, Commissions or Committees thereby.”

Publicly, there have been no sanctions, no reprimand, no warnings, no censure, and certainly no forfeiture or removal from office. 

In fact, other than the mayor’s statement about the (irrelevant) social media policy, the only reaction I’ve had, official or unofficial, from any of our councilors has been a private apology by Assistant Mayor Damren in late December, which several weeks later he repeated publicly along with a call for the same from his colleague.

Mr. Damren seems to be a man of conscience. I respect that. And I appreciate his outreach, but I have to point out that that’s merely his private opinion. Where’s the action by the council? Why isn’t more being done? Why is the same mayor who promised me over the phone in December that this incident would be taken seriously and not “swept under the rug” now ignoring my emails (more than one, and for more than a week) entirely?

The councilman’s behavior was bad. As time goes on, the city’s utter lack of response to that behavior is starting to look worse. If the city thinks it can just wait this out until people forget all about it, the city better think again. Because a couple members of the council are going to get sick of seeing my face pretty soon.

Or, if those councilors are sick of reading about themselves in these pages, perhaps they could try doing the right thing. For a change.

 

Sam Killay

Claremont