The Grass Valley City Council is considering taking an action tonight that deserves the attention of every citizen in this community.

Mayor Gerard Tassone has placed an item on the agenda that could lead to the removal of planning commissioner Terry Lamphier. The charge relates to an alleged violation of the City Council's code of ethics, specifically a provision that addresses but does not define inappropriate behavior.

Lamphier's alleged bad behavior revolves around whether he crossed a line when he wrote two Other Voice columns that were published in The Union. The first column criticized the City Council for approving the BriarPatch market project. The other was a more general column about the challenges this area faces as a result of growth.

The third potential violation cited in a staff report occurred when Lamphier appeared at a City Council meeting and posed questions about the Litton Hill development project.

The Union welcomes such commentary from our elected and appointed officials. We feel it is essential that they are candid and open with the public. In our view, Lamphier should be applauded for his willingness to articulate his concerns.

Tassone and unidentified council members are concerned, however, that Lamphier's outspokenness will send mixed messages to the community and further complicate a difficult job. Tassone also believes that written pieces for publication should be reviewed by the mayor who, according to the same code of ethics, is the official spokesperson for city government.



The mayor has said on more than one occasion that Lamphier can't "serve two masters," which seems to imply that his allegiance should be to the goals of the City Council that has the power to remove him from the planning commission.

It seems that application of the code of ethics in this case and the possible removal of Lamphier for his remarks will have a chilling affect on future and current members of the planning commission. If those members aren't allowed to state their views without the mayor's blessing, what role do they serve other than to please the council?

If they are only there to please the council, what is the purpose of having a planning commission? It needs to be an independent body that feels free to make decisions or it serves no purpose.

Another concern being cited as a possible violation of the code of ethics is that Lamphier may have been misidentified as a spokesperson for the city when he wrote his Other Voice columns, although he was clearly identified as a planning commissioner. We think the intelligence of this community is being underestimated if city officials assume their residents do not recognize that a planning commissioner is different than a spokesperson.

The code of ethics should be a document that encourages public officials to speak rather than make it more difficult or even risky. While we don't dispute the City Council has the authority and even the duty to remove a reckless or irresponsible planning commissioner, we do not believe Lamphier should be removed for writing a column for publication or speaking out at a council meeting.



If this removal is permitted to happen on these grounds and without a public outcry, we can look forward to having elected and appointed representatives who are reluctant to talk without first getting permission from the mayor. Will this approach best serve the interests of the community? We do not believe it will.



Terry Lamphier warned us that he would be removed from the planning commission after The Union identified him as a planning commissioner. We sincerely hope he's wrong.