Residents may voice their opinions on how an elected public official incited the public to take hostile action against a private organization to coerce a political outcome by contacting their city council members.
Columbus city councilwoman Evelyn “Mimi” Woodson (District 7) scolded and bullied the CEO of Uptown Columbus, Inc., Ed Wolverton, during the council meeting held on October 25, 2022.
The councilwoman then unbelievably tried to weaponize the public against the non-profit organization, urging her constituents to harass Uptown’s board members in order to force the organization’s compliance with her own personal political agenda.
Woodson’s unbecoming and seemingly-criminal antics were on full display for the entire city to see.
The tyrannical spat was in reference to the city’s unresolved plan to create an “entertainment district” in the downtown area; a legislation largely spearheaded by Woodson which she has attempted to rush through council's vote before a solid plan has been completed.
During the October 25 council meeting, Woodson asked Uptown CEO Ed Wolverton to provide a briefing on how the private organization can fill several gaping holes in the city’s proposed legislation.
Uptown hadn’t yet been able to provide the answers Woodson wanted, as its organization’s by-laws require board members to vote on sensitive issues like those concerning the proposed entertainment district. Wolverton stated the entire board would likely have to vote on how the private organization will proceed.
That vote, according to Wolverton, would not be able to happen until early December. The delay stalled Woodson’s attempts to rush the Council’s vote on the incomplete and half-baked ordinance.
When Woodson didn’t get the answers she was looking for and realized she could no longer rush the Council’s vote, Woodson began scolding Wolverton for not conforming to her own personal schedule and political agenda.
“It should be a responsibility of Uptown to call a special meeting … it would be very unresponsible (sic) if you didn’t call a special-called meeting … by the time we go back to the second reading (of the proposed ordinance),” Woodson dictated.
It is important to note that Uptown is not a governmental agency and is instead a private organization. It has no such responsibility to adhere to the wishes of city council nor Woodson. Ironically, and contrary to Woodson’s desires, Uptown is actually bound by law to follow its own by-laws and to conduct its business in a very specific way.
Continuing her remarks, Woodson then attempted to erroneously scapegoat Uptown and Wolverton for being the sole causes of her poorly-planned legislation’s continuous stalling:
“It’s not fair, because if it comes to where we need to vote but we can’t vote because we’re waiting on Uptown — which Uptown represents the merchants — it’s not fair to the merchants,” Woodson said, conveniently ignoring the many experienced merchants in the room who spoke against her proposed entertainment district in its current form.
Woodson then continued to scold Uptown and Wolverton, beginning her strong-arm routine against the private organization by urging the public to take hostile action against Uptown until they complied with her personal desires.
It should be noted that Woodson’s demeanor and facial expression changed dramatically to a bonafide predatory stare while making the following statement, facing her head downwards with her eyes upward at Wolverton while she grinned, appearing pleased with her own conniving and manipulative speech:
“I would highly suggest,” Woodson said, “or probably your merchants need to start ringing all your board members’ phone numbers like they would (against city) council — when there’s an issue in council and they want our attention (tone intensifies), guess what the public do? They call ‘aaaalllllll’ our phones and tell us the importance. Maybe, you know, your merchants need to do the same thing … maybe those 200-some signatures (on an unofficial petition) need to let the board know the importance of this. I’m just suggesting … I know it’s being recorded.”
Wolverton smiled and replied, saying, “Much like the city manager, I can’t make (our board) do that.”
Woodson then made another grossly erroneous statement in a further attempt to further weaponize the public against Wolverton and Uptown. It should be noted that the claims Woodson made in her statement are false and following her intent may constitute a crime under Georgia state law:
“The merchants and the public have the RIGHT to call them and voice their opinion just the same way they have the right to call us … when you accept a position on a board you accept that responsibility to answer to those that call you … these are your constituents like they are our constituents … and I would tell the people in the audience to start calling the (Uptown) board. Your phone numbers are not private; you're on a board.Your emails are not private.” Woodson incorrectly, irresponsibly, and recklessly stated.
Woodson failed to realize that she is a public elected official and that Uptown is a private organization with a board of private citizens. Uptown does not have “constituents,” nor does it have to answer the phone for anyone outside of its own private board. What Woodson encouraged the public to do isn’t only inappropriate and dangerous — it is a violation of local, state, and federal law.
While the public can of course contact their elected public officials, the private board members of Uptown Columbus, Inc. are private citizens; their personal contact information is in fact private and is protected by law. Uptown’s board members are not public officials. The public does not have any “right” to uninvitedly call the personal phones of Uptown’s private board members. Doing so constitutes the crime of harassment, which can carry a jail sentence under Georgia state law. It can also constitute stalking, which is a felony offense under Title 18 U.S.C.
The bizarre actions of Councilor Woodson appear to reveal her lack of understanding on the differences between elected government officials and private organizations — a key theme that threads through much of Columbus’ corrupt politics, undue influence, and unavoidable nepotism.
Woodson placing her own tyrannical true colors on display — openly inciting her constituents to harass a private organization to suit her political agenda — really appears to drive those truths home.
You can watch the entirety of the exchange through the video below. The exchange begins at the 1:43:27-mark of the video:
Residents may voice their opinions on how an elected public official incited the public to take hostile action against a private organization to coerce a political outcome by contacting their city council members.
Facts are stubborn things — and we’ll keep publishing them, whether city officials like them or not.
-30-
© 2022 Muscogee Muckraker. All rights reserved.
