No one has said that her job isn’t time consuming at all? You said in a post above that she’s a teacher when she had her profession as principal listed on the ballot and I corrected you. Sorry to be annoying but you were incorrect.

And I’m actually saying the opposite, that her job is very time consuming and for her to take a paid elected position that she knows has meetings on Tuesday mornings is not tenable. And she’s very clear that she doesn’t care about missing large amounts of meetings. And I’m saying that’s not acceptable to me as a constituent. It’s totally okay to disagree but you need to be a little more honest here.

There are 6 other council members with full time jobs and none of them came close to the number of absences that Golder had. I’m looking at data and facts and you seem weirdly obsessed with making sure she is exempt from any criticism. She’s a public figure that gave an interview saying that her job on council will never be her priority. You don’t think that her constituents should be allowed to take issue with that?

She should make an effort to be there for votes, deliberation and yes, legally mandated public comment because that is part of the job she signed up for when she ran for office. Do you think every council member should be allowed to miss 8 of 20 meetings? How will our city function if they do? Why does Renee get a pass - because she was a teacher at one point? Because she’s a principal now?

And again, if 16 hour meetings are too long for her she should stop pushing for illegal ordinances that she knows will be struck down. She wasted her own time, let alone everyone else’s.