MARYSVILLE, CA (MPG) - Candidate for Marysville Mayor Chris Branscum addressed the Marysville City Council special meeting on Tuesday, August 11^th and raised serious questions about events surrounding the termination of former city manager Marti Brown and the associations of the 3 who voted to terminate her on a 3 to 2 vote. He said there is a cloud overhanging the entire process that, in Marysville’s best interests, needs to be cleared up and the Grand Jury is probably the best venue for that.

His comments to the City Council follow:

“I believe there is a cloud overhanging this entire process.

First: A 3-2 vote to terminate the City Manager without cause is something of a scandal in itself, especially when you consider: (a) The total dollar cost of severance pay and recruiting and other out-of-pocket costs; (b) The turmoil and distraction from other pressing business; and, (c) The loss of continuity of effort on important projects.

All due to a termination without cause on a 3-2 vote!

Next: Let’s take a look at certain events and the behavior and association of the 3, the mayor and two councilmen, who voted to terminate the City Manager.

First: I understand from informed sources that one of the 3, a councilman, had been denied an approval from the city that he felt would have been important to property he owns and where he conducts his business, that being Stassi’s 4^th Ward, and that the City Manager had been involved in that denial.

Second: The denial and the councilman’s reported unhappiness with the decision was closely related in time with an initiative of the mayor and the two councilmen to first deny an extension of the City Manager’s contract beyond the end of this year and then the subsequent termination of the City Manager.

Third: The 3, the mayor and two councilmen, are reputed to be closely associated and are reportedly often seen together frequenting Stassi’s 4^th Ward, the councilman’s place of business that had been denied the approval.

Fourth: The mayor and the two councilmen have been accused of violating the Brown Act. The Brown Act provides that a majority of the members of a legislative body, here the mayor and two other members of the city council, shall not, outside an authorized meeting, discuss any item of business that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city council.

The Fair Political Practices Commission Guide to Understanding Conflicts of Interest clearly states, “the purpose of the law (governing conflicts of interest)…is to prevent biases, actual and apparent, that result from the financial interests of the decision-makers.”

What’s the takeaway?

The close connection in time of all these events and the nature of these relationships supports the conclusion of the appearance of a conspiracy with roots in a conflict of interest that encompasses the mayor and two councilmen and that apparent conspiracy led to termination of the City Manager on a 3-2 vote as an act of vengeance or to make way for a more pliable decision maker.

This is the cloud overhanging this process and in the best interests of the city it needs to be cleared up. The Grand Jury is probably the best venue for that.

In real time I am providing the text of these comments to the City Clerk via email for inclusion in the record. Thank you for your attention.”