Judge Ordered ICMA to Turn Over Discovery Documents & Text Communications in James Freed Lawsuit

Back in April 2023, James Freed and his attorneys were frustrated by the ICMA’s repeated efforts to stall and drag out the lawsuit. The ICMA refused to turn over evidence as required by law.

The ICMA wanted to “run out the clock” as long as possible because they knew that they were playing from a position of strength. It is very difficult for the average person to fight a legal battle.

Justice in America is very expensive.

Not only did the ICMA wrong Freed and his family when they publicly censured him in 2022, they were trying to screw him over every which way possible during the legal battle. They wanted to weaken his resolve, punish him financially, and win the case by forfeit hoping he would give up and tap out.

Fed up with unethical conduct of the ICMA executive board, Freed filed a motion to compel them to turn over evidence and sit for the depositions.

Last week, the ICMA made its first public statements on the Freed case when it posted a statement on LinkedIn and an article on its website written by Jason Grant, the director of advocacy.

The article,”In Defense of the ICMA Code of Ethics,” argued:

“The ICMA Credentialed Manager designation and membership in ICMA are respected because the requirement to adhere to the Code of Ethics provides public confidence that the individual is held to a higher standard of ethical conduct in their role as a city/county manager. And so, we must defend our right to hold ourselves accountable as ICMA members.”

In Defense of the ICMA Code of Ethics by Jason Grant

Where is the accountability when ICMA executive board members refuse to turn over documents and have to be compelled to do so under threat of sanctions by a judge?

Where is that higher standard of ethical conduct?

Burying Evidence

Could it possibly be that there was some concern that the text messages between Pamela Antil and Bill Fraser would damage their case?

It isn’t a good look when two members of the executive board who have never met Freed are having the following conversation as they get ready to hear his appeal of the public censure:

Antil was “all in” on the COVID vaccine mandate. She terminated employees who refused to get vaccinated. She despised those who did not share her world view on vaccines and because Freed dared to give his employees a choice (even though he was vaccinated himself), she was going to make sure he paid the price and was publicly censured.

The ICMA touts its adherence to the Code of Ethics. But time and time again we see that the Code of Ethics is only followed when it is convenient and it is weaponized against those they want to target for personal and/or political reasons.

Neither of these individuals ever apologized to Freed for this text exchange. The ICMA executive board never issued a formal statement or apology and nobody was punished despite the fact that this was clearly a violation of Tenet 3 of the Code.

The ICMA executive board can obstruct justice and deprive a peer of his due process rights in a court of law by refusing to turn over evidence until compelled to do so by a judge and there is no accountability.

When Grant talks about a “higher standard of ethical conduct” or accountability it is hard not to laugh.

Does he really believe what he wrote or does he just think the average ICMA member is too dumb to see through the gaslighting?