What are the community’s standards?

I had hoped to use this space to talk about the messy breakup going on between President Donald Trump and South Africa native Elon Musk. If only there were signs that could have warned us that this was coming.

But instead, I am once again writing about Gillette Reproductive Health.

This week, the Gillette City Council voted 4-3 to remove $30,000 in Optional 1% Sales Tax funds from the agency. There are two more readings, so there is a chance that it could be added back, but I’m not holding my breath.

Two members of the City Council, Mayor Shay Lundvall and Councilman Tim Carsrud, had not opposed this funding in past budget years. But I guess some new information came up that caused them to change their minds.

The timing of the “bombshell” about links on the agency’s website is suspicious to me and seems little more than grasping at straws. Why now?

It seems my prediction was right: Gillette Reproductive Health is going to be penalized for having wide community support. Perhaps the city should only fund organizations that are bad at fundraising or don’t have a lot of support.

The agency’s staff expressed frustration that there was little communication between them and the city council. Which raises the question: if an organization has the support of many members of a community, does that mean that is in line with community standards?

I also would like to point out that many of the agency’s supporters have lived in Gillette for decades. They would know better than most about what the community’s standards are.

There have been Christians and Republicans who have called for the funding to be pulled. But there also are many Christians and Republicans who have come out in support of the agency. Does that make those people Christian and Republican in name only? Are they liberals in sheep’s clothing? No, of course not. At least, not if you’re a reasonable person.

There are dozens of organizations that receive 1% funding, and I think many elected officials are unaware of how much these groups rely on that money. And they often don’t do anything more than surface level research on the organizations.

Imagine if the federal government made decisions to hamstring certain industries in parts of the country because of ideological differences? And imagine these government officials made those decisions while sitting in Washington, D.C. without ever visiting the communities that would be affected and talking to the residents and local elected officials there?

That would be crazy, wouldn’t it?

It would have been in the community’s best interest for the city council members to at least visit Gillette Reproductive Health. I hope that all of them take that opportunity in the near future.

Then again, maybe that’s asking too much of your local council member. After all, it is a very busy job. It’s not like they were elected to represent the community or anything.

The next few weeks will determine whether Gillette Reproductive Health gets its 1% request back. But if the city finalizes its decision to not fund the organization, it’s only a matter of time before another agency becomes the next target.

It won’t take much, just a claim from someone that “something” is going on.

No one is safe.