Urbana, Illinois Council member James Quisenberry arrived at a strange conclusion at a City Council meeting in early June.
When three of his fellow Council members all voted no to the reappointment of City Attorney David Wesner on June 6th, Quisenberry said that it seemed likely that those Council members had illegally colluded before the meeting.
The City Attorney vote passed four to three, but Quisenberry reasoned that three no votes was an unlikely result unless the same three Council members held an illegal meeting before the vote and agreed to all vote the same.
Quisenberry on June 7th: “Three is a troubling number in a body of seven because it has a potential of indicating that three people agreed to block something.”
But the numbers don’t add up: Quisenberry did not explain how three no votes would successfully “block” anything in a body of seven.
Urbana Council votes are often unanimous but a fair portion of votes fetch differing answers from the Council members. Four vs three votes are not uncommon. In fact, just minutes before the vote that Quisenberry said had the appearance of illegal collusion, Quisenberry found himself on the losing end of a four to three vote.
Quisenberry crafted his accusation in a way where he made it clear what he wanted the public to think, but at the same time back-pedaled, saying that he wasn’t actually suggesting that it happened in the way he described.
Quisenberry further claimed that he did not need to explain his yes votes, but that other Council members should explain their no votes.
Below is a video showing Quisenberry’s statements: