A recent report released by a Grievance Panel of the Studio City Neighborhood Council found that the petition to remove fellow board member Michael McCue "did not contain "reasonable detail" and that other missteps were made in removing him from the council this past April.
Three fellow board members brought the petition to remove McCue in May, only a month before voters were going to elect a new council.
McCue was removed for allegedly being disruptive at meetings, and making improper accusations, including accusing another member of misconduct of the use of the mailing list, "accusing a member of partying at a nightclub, continuing to speak when time is over, disseminating improper information or misleading information" and "engaging in inflammatory and threatening conduct both at meetings and in email communications."
McCue said the accusations were so vague he had no way to defend himself.
"Being critical is not an actionable item, I didn't know what I could say in response," said McCue.
The debate and discussion on that meeting, captured on video, included one council member in tears, another council member using the F-word to silence McCue, and warnings from visiting stakeholders who spoke that night included charges of McCarthyism, likening them to "the lynch mob in To Kill a Mockingbird" and suggestions that a dangerous precedent was being made by the council.
McCue said, "The only place in the world that I know that you are guilty without wrongdoing is if you live in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or to be a whistleblower on the Studio City Neighborhood Council."
McCue added that he was "considering legal options," but not against the council, against the overseeing neighborhood council body, the city's Department of Neighborhood Empowerment. McCue also said he thought he was owed an apology by the council.
The Grievance Panel, led by Jane Druker, met four times to review McCue's complaint entitled "The Illegal Vote to Remove McCue from the SCNC Board" and that the conduct of the president at the time, Ben Neumann.
The panel's report said, "The President's actions evidenced that he may have come to the meeting with a preconceived determination of the outcome and to have allowed his personal feelings to override proper procedural conduct of the meeting."
Also, the report said, "The Panel determined that the email sent by the President to Board members prior to the April 21st meeting conveyed personal opinion and therefore was deemed to be potentially prejudicial."
They also recommended that the council follow Robert's Rules of Order and that more of a definition should be delineated for the removal of a board member, and they establish "specific acts of conduct, with objective and measurable criteria" in the future.
Drucker, a former board member, said when presenting the report, "The stakeholders elected this person, it is an elected position. This is not a private club that has members that can be voted in and out."