« DHS Spa Restaurant Racks Up More Health Violations | Main | Action/Reaction »

November 8, 2021

Oroville City Council Masturbates For 58 Minutes

The City Council of Oroville, California, has approved a resolution declaring Oroville to be a "Constitutional Republic City." What does that mean? Who the fuck knows? We'll have to go to the sources to try to discover what they think they are saying.

Discussion of this item begins at 41:16 in the YouTube video of the council meeting.

Here is the essence of the resolution, after all the whereases:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council that the City of Oroville is declared to be a Constitutional Republic City.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Oroville City Council that any executive orders issued by the State of California or by the United States federal government that are overreaching or clearly violate our constitutionally protected rights will not be enforced by the City of Oroville against its citizens.

Nothing in the resolution attempts to define a "Constitutional Republic City." You can download the full agenda packet here. The resolution starts on page 231.

After the first public comment (which was in opposition to the resolution) the Mayor decided to ignore the Brown Act and engage in conversation with the commenter to explain what a "Constitutional Republic City" is:

I'm gonna give a little bit of clarification on that. A republic is actually what the country is under and we live under laws. A republic lives under laws and the people and the representatives will make the decisions for the communities. Actually, a democratic government when the representatives only 51% can do exactly what you're saying. They can make up laws if they want to, so we are living under a "constitution republic."

The mayor must have failed his civics class, if he took one. Here is the definition of "republic": "a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law."

The definition of "democracy": "government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system."

The essential difference between the two is that under democracy you could have direct rule by the people (as in a New England town meeting), while in a republic a select body rules. In California we have a blend. Most of the time the state acts as a republic, but citizen initiatives are direct democracy.

The public commenters, both for and against, seem to think the essence of being a "Constitutional Republic City" has something to do with wearing masks or not, or it might mean upholding the California and U.S. Constitutions. It does NOT somehow require the City of Oroville to come up with a constitution. Maybe they want to keep their constitution unwritten, like the U.K.

The mayor dipped into his well of ignorance a second time to explain that when an emergency is declared that means one person is being placed in charge. He may be thinking of martial law. Usually, declaring an emergency is simply a way to allow governments to get access to emergency funds. No dictatorship involved.

One intelligent commenter pointed out that the city code already includes a requirement to uphold the constitutions of both the U.S. and California, so everything this resolution purports to do (if it purports to do anything) is already done.

One city council member said this is the first time he's seen "common sense" in a resolution. He also said that the human immune system is the best thing you've got going on. I assume that means no medications, no doctor visits of any sort, no dentistry, no eyeglasses. Break a leg? Walk it off!

Another city council member who obviously passed her high school civics class with flying colors pointed out that the final statement of the resolution [quoted above] attempts to give the city council the authority to decide the constitutionality of every state and federal executive order and this exceeds the powers given to the Oroville city council by its charter. She explains that our constitutional system has already placed that power in the hands of the judicial branch.

One city council member seemed to think that if the resolution were passed the city would lose all state and federal funding! She wanted a statement added to the resolution that the city might become bankrupt.

The city's attorney explained the resolution does not include anything to authorize staff to "do anything or take any action." Any future decision(s) by the council to obey or not obey future mandates from the federal or state governments would require additional action by the city council. It's a policy statement only. The resolution by itself could not result in the loss of any funding.

One city council member who supported the resolution also acknowledged it had no teeth. He said the public needs to realize the resolution changes nothing.

The motion to approve included the removal of the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth whereas (the ones that mention Gavin Newsom).

It's interesting that during the vote the mayor permitted on-microphone discussions between council members on how they should vote. It took more than two minutes for the voting to be complete. The result was 6-1.

The Oroville city council spent 58 minutes discussing and approving a resolution that does absolutely nothing. It's hard to imagine an effective city council that has that much time to waste.

Filed under California | permalink | November 8, 2021 at 11:04 AM


An article in the East Bay Times that attempts to assess the "meaning' behind Orovile's resolution reveals that the mayor knows even less than he thinks he does. He's got to be a Republican.

They mayor says "a mandate is not a law. A mandate is an agreement between two people. If you want me to do something and I agree to it, we have a mandate." Wrong-o. That's an agreement, an understanding, a contract, an MOU, but it's not a mandate. The definition of "mandate" can be found in a dictionary, a book that has never sullied the hands of the mayor: "an official order or commission to do something."

Posted by: Ron at Nov 15, 2021 12:26:10 PM

Post a comment

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In