Current Listing

Perhaps Mayor Simmons took seriously her responsibility to not engage in “serial communications”. A serial communication according to the State Attorney General is where ” A governing body risks violating meetings law through a series of private communications, even if a quorum isn’t involved in any single communication. We recommend that members of a governing body should not meet in private to discuss business, or exchange private communications about business, even if those involved constitute less than a quorum. Such a gathering creates the appearance of impropriety, and runs contrary to the policy of the Public Meetings Law, which supports keeping the public informed of the deliberations of governing bodies. ” Oregon DOJ on Public Meetings.

Translation: In Manzanita, less than a quorum means two Council members. Those two members of the City Council are not to communicate in person, by phone, text or email to discuss City business.

Prior to Mayor Simmons, a dissenting opinion or a no vote on an item of City business was unheard of. Has anyone else gotten a sense that over the years that decisions appear to have already been made before a Council discussion and vote? I wonder if you could find a single Council decision that had a less than unanimous vote in the past 15 years of Council meetings. Makes one wonder how such unanimity is possible for all of those Council decisions.

It would appear that in our city, attempting to follow the law or asking questions to better understand how the City operates puts one at risk of both criticism and investigation.

The now released acknowledgement of the expenditure of at least $139,000 of public funds for this report on the investigation of Mayor Simmons is a public record. The public interest in knowing how the Mayor acted inappropriately in her duties outweighs any reasonable claim by the City of a compelling need to refuse to disclose its findings and release the report.

Randy Kugler

Attendees at the UN’s COP28 climate summit in Dubai this week are being treated to a wide array of meat cuisine options even as many attendees — including the UN itself — urge governments to limit meat consumption for taxpayers.
COP28 is offering its 70,000 participants a selection of nearly 100 restaurants and food carts, at least a third of which specialize in beef and dairy dishes. Attendees can choose “juicy beef” and “slabs of succulent meat,” barbecued chicken and steak, hamburgers, Philly cheesesteaks, shawarma, carne asada, Tex Mex chicken, birria, kebabs, “melt-in-your-mouth BBQ,” smoked meats, and more.
“Our focus at COP28 UAE is on delivering environmentally sustainable, socially responsible, delicious, and nutritious food and beverage,” said the summit’s website. “This is a key priority for the Presidency, and we are striving to show the world how climate-friendly food can be tasty, healthy and affordable.”
“Working with Nutritics, we aim to ensure that 50% of the food served within sustainable limits for carbon and water intensity and is within UAE nutritional guidelines,” the site added.
The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) is expected to publish dietary guidelines at the summit which will demand the United States and other developed nations limit their meat consumption to “fight climate change.”
Although past climate conferences have focused on curbing carbon emissions in manufacturing, transportation, and power sectors, this will be the first year that extra pressure will be brought to bear on the agriculture industry.
Developing countries which already consume less meat will also be issued guidelines to follow, reported Bloomberg, which will involve reforming their farming practices to make them more “sustainable.”
While the expected document is considered to be the first of its kind from the UN, the globalist organization has long been urging Western countries to eliminate meat from their diets due to the methane emissions from livestock.
A global “climate-friendly” diet, which includes little to no meat, has long been a globalist goal and is beginning to be implemented by the C40.
The C40 is a George Soros-funded conglomerate of nearly 100 global mayors who have pledged to transform their cities to meet the World Health Organization’s Air Quality Guidelines. To meet those guidelines, C40 has adopted a slew of measures including a meal plan for taxpayers called the Planetary Health Diet. The diet is limited to 2,500 calories a day and is mostly plant based, with 50% fruits and vegetables and 50% other foods such as whole grains, plant-based protein, legumes, nuts, and small amounts of animal-sourced protein. 
New York City Mayor Eric Adams earlier this year signed onto a C40 plan for a 33% reduction in carbon emissions by reducing meat and dairy in taxpayers’ diets. The city has already made plant-based meals the default option for patients in the Health + Hospitals network, and Adams’ office says it is on track to distribute 850,000 plant-based meals to patients in 2023.
New York City also became subject to new food standards last year which placed a cap on the amount of meat that can be served by municipal agencies and a minimum quota for plant-based foods. The rules also state that processed meats must be phased out by 2025.
Other globalist figures are also doing their part to limit meat consumption for taxpayers in wealthier nations. Billionaire Bill Gates is funding several fake meat companies in the hope of replacing meat completely in developed countries. If the public cannot be convinced to switch to fake meat then they should be forced to do so by government regulation, he said.
“I don’t think the poorest 80 countries will be eating synthetic meat,” Gates told the MIT Technology Review in 2021. “I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”

i am a long-term nehalem resident who has been following manzanita city council discussions and decisions.

i would like to comment on your narrative in your BBQ post.

1) “our deeply rooted, well regarded and honorable mayor ….” deb simmons is not deeply rooted in manzanita. she was a political unknown when she ran for mayor. she had no previous government experience, so i would think that she is neither “well regarded” nor “not well regarded.” based on her tenure as mayor, she has certainly garnered both of those appellations. i do know that she was a well-regarded fifth grade school teacher in nehalem grade school for a number of years after her “retirement” to manzanita,

2) i also don’t get why there is an ongoing investigation, and i agree with you that it is opaque to the public. i am aghast that it has cost the city of manzanita 6 figures in expense (don’t get me started on the hourly rate that lawyers charge). i do understand that whatever this is, the council was informed of the employee complaint by the city attorney in May 2023, and the council voted unanimously in June 2023 to authorize the independent investigation that was strongly advised by the city attorney and their insurer. It would certainly be more comfortable for all on the city council if they could release more information, but legally they cannot. i do not think there is a “cover-up” by city council members. it’s typical in litigation to not publicize ongoing discussions. i agree that it IS frustrating to not really know what is going on.

3) i had high hopes for deb simmons’ tenure as mayor. then already in the first months of her tenure i learned two things that i thought were odd.
a) she refused the traditional conversation with the outgoing mayor. i thought to myself, “hmmm…. that’s strange.”
b) she nixed the new planning commission appointees that had been selected with due process. i thought this action was also strange, since she was brand new in her tenure as mayor. (i also wondered how she got to unilaterally nix due process and appoint who she wanted.)

4) as the months continued i learned that deb simmons refused all discussion with other council members except at public meetings. i found this also strange. especially as a newbie to politics, you would think one-on-one discussion with fellow council members would be valuable.

5) while you state you are in the dark about the investigation, nevertheless you have come to the conclusion that “there have been no findings of wrongdoing by the Mayor and the council is covering it up.” do we know that this investigation involves the former mayor? do we know that her resignation has anything to do with the employee complaint investigation? i am wondering what facts led you to this conclusion.

6) “hundreds of grassroots petition signers” is an exaggeration. manzanita has a population of 633 permanent residents. that’s how many people get to vote (if they are registered—which i would guess most of them are). i believe the petition signers represented about 20% of that number (and were they all permanent residents? were they all registered voters?).

7) “The council has demonstrated a pattern of overlooking smart, experienced citizens to fill vacancies on the council….”
a) when the council appointed kathryn stock to the council to fill a vacancy, i read all the letters of application. hers stood out head and shoulders above the others, both for the level of intelligence about city concerns, and for the depth of her work experience that would stand her in good stead. the council didn’t “overlook” anyone; they picked who seemed to them to be the best candidate.
b) ditto when the council picked brad hart to fill a vacancy.

8) “our mayor was elected by hundreds of voters….” 356 to be exact. running unopposed.

9) “A minority of loud activists appears to be calling the shots….” from attending city council meetings, the council members appear to me to be both thoughtful and well-prepared. they are intelligent, successful-in-their-careers, retired citizens who have chosen to serve the city and its residents on city council. i have had conversation with each of them at one time or another. i don’t believe any of them sits on city council for personal gain, or for any undisclosed motive. they just want to bring their capability and experience to serve the citizens of the city in which they live. i don’t think any of them are listening to “loud activists.”

10) i’m wondering what are the facts that justify you stating that the current city council is dominated by an “anti-diversity, anti-inclusive mindset….”

i agree with you, linda, that the fracturing of the community is very sad. where i don’t agree with you is as i’ve listed above.

om peace namaste

lucy brook
nehalem resident

Troubles in Manzanita

Posted on December 17, 2023 by North Coast BBQ

Submitted By: hildiballard@gmail.com

Friends and Neighbors,

“If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking”
George S Patton to his troops

The troubling developments of the last few weeks in Manzanita have citizens worried. Our deeply rooted, well-regarded and honorable Mayor felt the need to resign her position, this, subsequent to the resignation of two city councilors this year and the sudden ‘retirement’ of a long term city hall employee. What is going on in Manzanita?

An opaque employee complaint emerged this year and an investigation has been ongoing, for months, with the citizens footing the bill of $139,000.00 and counting. Citizen requests for investigation findings have been stonewalled. If there has been wrongdoing we need to know about it. This investigation is a public record and subject to disclosure. The city council has not been transparent about the issue furthering distrust. Citizens remain in the dark.

My conclusion is that there have been no findings of wrongdoing by the Mayor and the council is covering it up. The power of ugly innuendo has served its purpose resulting with the Mayor’s resignation. Had there been any wrongdoing you can be sure that information would have leaked all over the place. Who is responsible for this expensive mess.?

Our Mayor was elected by hundreds of voters and sought to represent them by asking tough questions. She pushed back on spending matters for which we applaud her. She pushed back on ‘group think’.
The failures of this council to cultivate diversity of opinion is costly. Some seek unity in the community, but unity is built on trust and that trust is absent here.

A minority of loud activists appears to be calling the shots while hundreds of grassroots petition signers have been ignored. It is time to act inclusively and respect and include diverse opinions.

The council has demonstrated a pattern of overlooking smart, experienced citizens to fill vacancies on the council (despite their repeated efforts) and this further erodes trust – goodbye unity.

It is time to root out the anti-diversity, anti-inclusive mindset that dominates the current city council. The damage done so far is enough, the body count too high, the fracturing of the community too sad.

Linda Ballard
Manzanita Homeowner