The latest County scandal du jour involving Supervisor Gibson has turned into a slow Death By Muddlement, drip, drip, drip. First came the announcement that he had been sleeping with his aide, but that was nobody's business, so move along. Then the County twisted itself into a pretzel to cover it's behind and announce, "nothing to see here, move along." The lapdog Tribune, a paper that never passed up a chance to curry favor with the powers that be, fell all over itself in failing to ask the necessary questions and settled, instead, for expressing editorial "disappointment" in Gibson's behavior, while dribbling out bits of story that contained delightful, contradictory nonsense.
Case in point was December 5th story by Bob Cuddy who wrote that County Counsel Rita Neal said that "Bruce Gibson violated no policy, misused no money and did not expose the county to any significant legal liability."
Misused no money? Really?
The money allocated for legislative aides is to pay aides to, well, do "legislative aide" work for the Supervisors. The job is a direct hire, at-will position, under the direct control of the Supervisor. It is not an interchangeable county job, with the County being the "employer." So, that budget item wasn't allocated to pay Aides to go work in another office doing entirely different duties. Yet Mr. Cuddy's story makes clear that Ms. Aspiro, Gibson's love interest and former aide, "is still an employee of Gibson's, on temporary assigment, earning $68,890, which is paid from the Board of Supervisor's budget." And that "Gibson is functioning without a legislative aide and has not been interviewing prospective replacements . . ." And "It is not clear who is doing that position's work -- the aides of other supervisors, or Gibson himself."
So, let's recap here:
1) Ms. Aspiro is still getting paid from the Supervisor's budget, which was specifically allocated for legislative aides
2) but she is not doing the work she was specifically hired and paid to do
3) and she is still an employee of Gibson's.
Isn't this where we came into this story? Gibson sleeping with his employee who's still his employee? But now it's suddenly O.K because she moved to another office and continues to not do the work she was hired to do?
Yet County Counsel Rita Neal states that Gibson "misused no money?" Really? And Cuddy doesn't ask the obvious followup questions his own article raised, while the Tribune's editorial the next day overlooked those same questions (doesn't anybody at the Tribune read their own paper?) and wrote one of their infamous editorials, known as The Bland Dismissives: Yes, Yes, very disappointing, but it's time to move along now, so shut up and stop asking questions, case closed.
In other words, pure SLOTOWN! at its finest.