imported post
I had an opportunity to speak with the individual prior to the meeting. He stated that he was not "up to speed" with what was going on and what the history of NPD and City Council was. I introduced him to Philip and a few others who discussed specifics and isues with him for a few minutes. He and I spoke for another few seconds concerning the number of trips to City Council meetings to express concern/displeasure about the behavior of the NPD.
From my short conversation with him I got the impression that he was upset not only about how NPD had treated Dan Moore, but about something else to do with how the City Council was or was not doing what he saws the Council's "job" - a word he used several times.
My impression was that he was unacustomed to public speaking, was quite upset about a number of things that City Council had done or not done, and was in search of a quick way of telling City Council how he felt. My impression, again, was that he "grabbed" for and used the Freudian comment instead of using much more socially inappropriate words.
My never-humble opinion was that his statement hurt the "cause" much less than the ramblings of the gentleman who was desparately trying to see things from every possible side and not pick a side himself. This was the gentleman who, among other things, suggested that HRT bus drivers be issued CHPs and carry "because of the bad things that happen on buses."
stay safe.
skidmark