Venice: Ron Feinsod’s “Consortium” is not happy that Fred Fraize’s application for a committee was shot down because of his negative social media rants about Republican’s
By Francesco Abbruzzino, Publisher – The Scoop News
Joe Nuender pushed to remove the appointment of Fred Fraize from the consent agenda. His concern is the type of rhetoric and inflammatory remarks that Fraize has been making on social media towards Republican’s. The social media comments were brought to his attention by members of the public, that saw his name on on the agenda. You can watch the video below.
Joe read out his comments or some that he came across that were posted on social media. I can state that Fred does tend to lose it on social media, with a lot of his anger geared towards Republican’s. One of the comments that Joe read, was where Fraize called the President a murdering xxxxxx.
Joe would like an interviewing process, so that the candidates can be weeded out, versus just putting a name out there and voting. So, he is asking for a delay on the Fraize vote, until a process can be put in place.
I will state that Fred Fraize is one of the “Consortium” members with very close ties to Ronald Feinsod, who pushed his name for the appointment.
Rich Caturro and Mitzie stood by Fred, calling him passionate and dedicated. He feels that we need to separate Fred’s thoughts about Republican’s and what he is stating, from the appointment.
Helen Moore feels that we should be able to consider what individuals are expressing on social media or other platforms. She does not find it appropriate.
The Venice City Council voted NOT to move approve Fred Fraize by a 4 – 2 vote. Mitzie who is up for re-election this year and is the consortium’s candidate and Rich voted to appoint Fred
Below is a letter that former Council Member Deborah Anderson sent me, regarding the issue involving Fred Fraize’s appointment to the Construction Board.
I was sent a JPG of some of Fred’s comments, they are below
This concerns the recent vote to not allow Fred Fraize to serve on a city advisory board.
I would like to draw your attention to the First Amendment which protects freedom of speech. Political speech is especially protected regardless of whether it is offensive or one disagrees with it. (paraphrasing the U.S. Supreme Court). Of course, since this Amendment governs local government conduct (paraphrasing the 14th Amendment), any analogy to a private employer using social media to make employment decisions is, of course, irrelevant.
When you voted to deny Mr. Fraize a place on an advisory board, you violated a constituent’s Constitutional right to freedom of speech.
What is also disturbing is you ignored Mr. Fraize’s prior participation on two city advisory boards which was not only exemplary, but widely recognized and appreciated by residents. While you may think “who cares, he didn’t get reelected to city council”, I urge you to remember he lost by a miniscule number of votes and his opponent, Ms. Moore and several of her supporters, pleaded guilty to various campaign finance violations. Oh, and there was all the developer dark money that, come to think of it, supported all four of you. How interesting that you are the only ones that voted to deny a resident, who is coincidentally considered to be “slow growth, a place on a city advisory board. Clearly all of this money was not wasted.
As for Mr. Neunder, perhaps if you’re lucky Pat Neal will pat you on the head and toss you a dog biscuit.