Did you hear about 3rd District Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg's old switcheroo at the June 6 SLO County Board of Supervisors meeting? Yeah, she accidentally voted with the board's conservative minority and didn't realize her mistake until the meeting intermission, when—presumably—one of her fellow liberals, 2nd District Supe Bruce Gibson or 4th District Supe Jimmy Paulding, took her aside and said, "What the hell, Dawn?" When the meeting reconvened, Ortiz-Legg asked for a takeback.
The vote in question was a "resolution condemning racism, bigotry, bias, and hate speech in our community," which stemmed from the recent racist display of an "Embrace White Pride" banner being held over a North County Highway 101 overpass whose street and community shall not be named because ... well, here's where it gets tricky! We don't want to hurt anyone's feelers!
I mean, sure, condemning racism seems like it should be a no-brainer, unless you're 5th District Supe Debbie Arnold, who took her red pen to the resolution for a little bit of editing. Well, actually, a lot of editing. By the time she got done with it, the document looked like the sort of redacted nonsense reporters get when they file a Freedom of Information Act request.
The main problem was that the resolution mentioned—OK, I'm just going to say it—"Vineyard Drive freeway overpass in Templeton," and Arnold didn't like that it "called out" Templeton.
"I don't think it helps when we react to something divisive with something more divisive," she said, complaining that the resolution was "calling out a community that had nothing to do with that."
She's not wrong. Those racist dipshits were not locals, and Arnold went on to explain that she "assumed" they were "professional agitators that carried that banner into other communities," so it was unfair to mention Templeton. OK, I'll go along with that, but Arnold's red pen didn't stop at those six words, and Paulding wasn't buying it.
He argued, "It doesn't single out any community; it simply states a fact that the instance occurred in this community." He also noted that public commenters were arguing that the resolution was "infringing on First Amendment rights," that it "might be misused to punish people with good intentions," and he noted one commenter asked why the phrase "white pride" was considered hate speech—all to suggest, I guess, that there are local racist sympathizers among us.
Well, duh. Paulding also pointed out that the white pride kooks were throwing "Nazi salutes, the heil Hitler," and that they told a Latino family nearby to "go back to their country." In other words, he really wanted this resolution to be as strongly worded and historically accurate as possible.
Arnold countered that her edits were only removing parts of the resolution that "just seemed repetitive," but I think she's confused between "repetitive" and "thorough."
Gibson chimed in that Arnold's changes "strip out any sense that this board cares," reminding his colleagues and the public that a 12-year-old testified about how the racist display was damaging personally.
Instead of adopting Arnold's watered-down version, Gibson simply said, "Strike the words 'on the Vineyard Drive overpass in Templeton.'" Done and done! Ortiz-Legg said she was also OK with removing the location only.
Then 1st District Supe John Peschong got his two cents in, saying the white pride Nazis were "from Tulare County," not Templeton. Way to throw Tulare County under the bus! Peschong also mentioned that he'd spoken to Caltrans and CHP, and the banner was protected under the First Amendment.
We all get that, but that doesn't mean the board members can't exercise their First Amendment right to condemn bigotry, does it?
"The Templeton that I know are the Templeton that showed up the week after, 150 different people from Templeton to counterprotest those people," Peschong said.
Agreed! So just take out the specific location, but nope! He wanted a vote on Arnold's entire edit. He also complained, "We're calling attention to this, and that's what these folks want."
So, don't condemn bigotry because it gives bigots attention? Huh?
Then Arnold suggested that maybe other supes from other districts shouldn't have a vote, just her and Peschong since they represent Templeton, which Paulding pushed back on reminding them that the BOS is a regional body. Yes, these meetings are boring, but sometimes they get spicy! They often get head-scratchingly dumb, too, because when Peschong finally called a vote on the Arnold edits, Ortiz-Legg voted yes.
Did you have a momentary blackout, Dawn?
Anyway, after the break, Ortiz-Legg said she wanted a do-over.
"I didn't understand the extent of the changes," she said. "That's my mistake. I'm embarrassed about that, but I'm asking for a reconsideration of that resolution."
I had whiplash and I did a spit take. Everyone but Peschong voted to allow a revote on the resolution: "No, I don't want to reconsider," he said, probably because he was thinking, "this dummy over here accidentally voted in my favor."
The good news is, the BOS is on record for condemning bigotry 3-2. The bad news is that bigots still exist. Δ
The Shredder thinks people CAN change their minds but it's hard TO change people's minds. Comment at shredder@newtimesslo.com.