AT ISSUE: Do you agree with Councilwoman...
AT ISSUE: Do you agree with Councilwoman Stacey Murphy’s decision to
return to the dais after Aug. 26?
I don’t see any other way for Stacey Murphy to have handled this
difficult situation. If she was at the meeting, nothing would get
done as the gadflies would have spent hours lecturing her. If she
didn’t show up, people would assume her guilty.
I presume her to be innocent, but I also believe her to be wise
enough to want the city to be able to conduct business. I think she
is handling a difficult situation as graciously as possible.
LYNNE GERRED
Burbank
As a Burbank resident who voted for Councilwoman Stacey Murphy,
who was recently arrested on cocaine possession and child
endangerment charges, I am appalled and angered that she has chosen
to retain her position pending her Aug. 25 court date.
A letter from Murphy, read at Tuesday night’s City Council
meeting, stated she would continue to serve but not attend meetings
and therefore face residents. How brave of her.
Murphy’s alleged crime is tied to a gang police say is responsible
for the murder of Burbank Police Officer Matthew Pavelka. And now
she’s going to keep her position, making decisions that would affect
the Burbank Police Department, the same department which arrested
her?
Though innocent until proven guilty, at worst Murphy would be a
felon, at best she is a person of poor character judgment to keep the
company of Scott Schaffer, who allegedly traded guns to the gang in
exchange for cocaine. Clearly this is not someone capable of making
decisions for the residents of Burbank.
The other four City Council members’ silence on the matter at
Tuesday’s City Council meeting is unacceptable. They were elected to
be leaders in the community, and at a time when leadership is needed,
no one has stepped forward to call for Murphy’s resignation.
Just because Murphy has been a good listener of residents’
concerns and has served the city, doesn’t mean she should continue to
do so. I ask Murphy to muster any remaining dignity she has and do
the right thing for the city of Burbank, resign immediately.
THERESA SHAW
Burbank
Why is this even a question?
As a resident of Burbank since 1972, my feeling is why would this
even be a possibility. She has discredited her position in the City
Council and allegedly involved herself with criminals.
Are we that desperate to have criminals and dishonest people
running our city? The integrity and independence that our fair city
has from the city of Los Angeles is what sets us apart. I am
disgusted and appalled at the nerve she has to even suggest that she
return. I would think that the city would have enough common sense to
recommend her immediate resignation and vow to investigate all money
associated with her boyfriend who generously contributed to the
campaigns of some of the other council members.
She is not an upstanding citizen or council member and should be
dealt with accordingly. As a parent, I hope she has plenty to answer
to with child services officials and look forward to seeing justice
served. I hope the city of Burbank will see the simplicity in doing
the right thing for the city and it’s constituents by not allowing
her to return to her seat on the council.
On another note, I applaud the Burbank Police Department in
joining our neighboring law enforcement agencies on the recent
crackdown of the Vineland Boyz gang and other drug and gun
trafficking criminals! It’s about time!
CINDY GREGOS
Burbank
I feel that Stacey Murphy is making the right decision in this
matter and should remain on the City Council until a conclusion is
reached either way.
People need to remember that these are charges based on the
evidence available to law enforcement officials. A criminal charge is
not in itself a guarantee of a verdict either way. The preliminary
trial may even determine that there is insufficient evidence to
continue. While I wholeheartedly encourage people to monitor the
case, please allow the system to work and keep in mind that is why we
have it in the first place. Guilt or innocence is something that will
be and needs to be determined in a court of law, not decided in the
media.
While I have my own opinion in the matter, it is not my duty or
position to decide as there may be additional evidence that is not
being made available to the media or public at this point in the
investigation.
I will say that I feel Murphy has been one of the best council
members we have ever had. I see her as an honest person that has gone
beyond the norm in support of her constituents and the city.
Obviously her credibility will come into play throughout this matter
and I feel that is one of her strong points. We all make bad
decisions and mistakes in life and this is definitely up at the top
no matter how you try to look at it. For anyone to stand on their
personal soapbox and declare guilt at this point is just wrong.
Should the outcome be against Murphy, then I would hope that the
city look back at all agenda items having to do with the type of
business Scott Schaffer is involved in and reevaluate the decision.
If any such item passed or was denied unanimously, fine. If there was
a split in the vote then the item should be brought back to avoid any
accusation of conflict of interest. I will continue to monitor the
news reports.
MARK KNIGHT
Burbank