The Sexist

5C Commissioner Gigi Ransom Censure Found Invalid

On June 5, Advisory Neighborhood Commission 5C voted voted to censure fellow Commissioner Gigi Ransom over a laundry list of alleged no-nos [PDF]. The allegations against Ransom included:

* sending a racially charged e-mail to Commissioner Barrie Daneker, which the ANC termed a "potential hate crime";

* attempting to order surplus government furniture for her home office; and

* interfering with ANC business with her “erratic outbursts and outlandish behavior.”

Now, the ANC 5C's official disapproval of Ransom's behavior is causing some ANC interference of its own.

Ransom has publicly contested her censure since the motion was first introduced in a May ANC 5C meeting. Two months later, Ransom has received a bit of legal backing to help her contest the censure, and the charges therein.

On July 20, Ransom received a letter from the Attorney General's Office, which identified the motion to censure as "legally improper." Senior Assistant Attorney General  Sheila Kaplan did not address the "merits or factual basis" of the censure's charges against Ransom, but did find that "proper procedure" was not followed in censuring her.

The ANC, Kaplan found, is required to provide a trial—or at the very least, a "fact-finding by the whole assembly or committee"—before censuring a commissioner. The fact-finding, furthermore, must be held in a "confidential setting" in order to protect the "reputation of the accused"—requirements Ransom says were never met before the issue was called for a vote.

Feel like watching the procedural can of worms unfold? The issue is slated for discussion at tonight's ANC 5c meeting, to be held at 7 p.m. at St. George's Church, 160 U Street NW.

Comments

  1. #1

    So how did it go?

  2. #2

    Again, the meeting started late, and ran over. I had to leave. but, I had requested the item be placed on the agenda. In spite of the facts the OAG stated, the procedure being "legally improper", the publizing of the alleged charges, which should not have been done, the failure to have a non-public fact finding process, etc, Comm. Bonds stated they are going to consider dropping the allegation of the external offense of ordering surplus equipment to be delivered to my home (which they had no proof, nor did I order). They will consider pursuing the "alleged internal offenses", whatever they may be. According to Robert's Rule, the only thing I can see is the alleged "consistent disregard, erratic behavior, etc." Note, there is no mention of what the behavior was, nor was it in the approved minutes. Go figure. I have been defamed, presented in a False Light, they are subject to liability because of this, and they still want to pursue this!

    Many residents have stated that they don't understand what is going on, what 5C did was terrible, with a total disregard for due process. The fact that there are no standards/rules for an ANC proposed censure, has never been used by an ANC, the DC Council has outlined a process for the allegations against CM Barry that protects his rights and due process, the question is, why are some members of 5C so determined to get me removed? What are they trying to keep from me? The complete legal opinion can be found at: http://www.edgewooddc.org. I am still having to go through a recall process.

Comments Shown. Turn Comments Off.
...