OPINION: The City of St. George and the emperors new clothes
Written by Dallas Hyland
Ever heard the saying that you don’t have to know what happened to know what didn’t happen? Like when someone tells you something you know for a fact is absolutely false, but because you do not yet know the truth, you are temporarily stuck with the answer being presented?
That is the sense I got Thursday night as I watched the live feed of the City of Saint George’s city council meeting where city firefighter Tyler Whitehead got up to appeal a recent demotion in the department.
Never mind that I found it curious that such things fell under the purview of the council at all, rather than a human resources department like most departments in the country. That may be a policy in the city that like some of the other policies, say the ones on dancing, make no sense whatsoever but in order to follow along with the proceedings, one would be wise to be versed in them.
This could have been a business as usual meeting save the fact that this one man in uniform, accompanied by a host of others in like dress, was met that evening with a fierceness of opposition not consistent with the matter he brought forth.
From what I or anyone else can gather from the meeting, Whitehead had been administratively disciplined within the department for failing to meet a minimum standard of training requirements. Pretty cut and dry right? Or perhaps it’s because this demotion was preceded by something else. Something else, like say, Whitehead bringing issues about the department to the City that needed correcting. Whitehead’s adamant insistence appears to be coming from a place of feeling as though his demotion had less to do with his qualifications than a stance he was taking. And furthermore, the fact that he was limited at the outset by what he could speak about in a public city council meeting lends one to wonder just what exactly the city doesn’t want everyone to to know.
The notion that he would prevail in such an appeal was likely going to be contingent upon what he brought forth in his defense. Some reason or reasons why he was not able to complete the training requirements per department policies and why an exception on his behalf should be made so that he would presumably be reinstated to his previous rank, and receive the compensation for said rank.
But here is where it gets curious in my mind. For this seemingly simple matter, the city saw fit to not only have council members in chambers to hear his appeal, but the fire chief, the city attorney, and the city manager also sat in attendance.
Lets skip to the verdict for a minute to help with the context of my curiosity. It was unanimous against him. Almost as though the matter had been predisposed to that verdict, it was decided that Whitehead’s demotion would stand.
But what happened in between is what stands out. Beginning with Mayor Pike, as he seemingly looked over the documents Whitehead presented, which contained the issues he would be addressing before council, and summarily dismissing most of them as matters not pertinent to the appeal. How does the Mayor, or anyone else on the council, determine what is not pertinent to the appeal? It appeared, at least to me, that the Mayor was familiar with, or perhaps had at least been briefed, on the matter beforehand.
Add to this the fact that throughout the proceeding, which lasted for what had to be an unusually long time for any one individual addressing the council, that Whitehead’s appeal was addressed by the city attorney in a matter consistent with a court proceeding, despite not being one, up to and including cross examination, and one would wonder why an attorney was not present on Whiteheads behalf.
I am not privy yet to all of the information leading up to the firefighters impetus for going before the council, but what I have discerned thus far from watching the overwhelmingly defensive posture of the city in the matter, is that there is much more to this story than a simple departmental demotion.
The city was nervous about what this man was bringing forward and appeared to want to limit what he could say publicly and on the record. Which brings to the forefront the possibility that the city violated his First Amendment right to free speech and also begs the glaring question: Why is any city personnel matter vetted and decided in public at all? As with many other situations whereby the city’s accountability may or may not be at stake, they presented a front that says, “Nothing to see here folks, move along.”
Likened to the fairy tale of an emperor being the last to know he is the only one in the crowd with no clothes, it is somewhat see through.
It has my attention. Perhaps it should have yours.
See you out there.
Dallas Hyland is a freelance writer, award-winning photographer, and documentary filmmaker with three films currently under his belt. The opinion editor of The Independent, Hyland’s investigative journalism and opinion columns have ranged in topics from local political and environmental issues, to drug trafficking in Utah, as well as the international front, covering issues such as human trafficking in Colombia. On his rare off-days, he can be found with his family and friends exploring the pristine outdoors. Listen to him live as a regular guest co-host on the Perspectives talk show on Fox News 1450 AM 93.1 FM in southern Utah.
Click on the right to get our Sunday Edition via email –>
