Pot... Meet Kettle
Earlier this week, I wrote about the workshop in Crystal River where the city council discussed how to move forward with evaluations for the city manager. At that meeting, Councilmember Chris Ensing called out text messages between myself and the city manager and said that if she were his employee, he would have fired her.
He stated he had no confidence in her moving forward as a result.
If you recall, I had mentioned there is a behind the scenes effort to get rid of the city manager. Like everyone else, I hear rumors of this or that, but I cannot put that into writing. I need proof before I mention something and I want you all to see it as I mention it.
Every single one of my articles comes with proof. You may not agree with my opinion on something, but you cannot say that it does not come with proof to back it up.
I now have the proof of behind the scenes influence...
But first... I want to show you an email that was sent to the council on January 25th, a few days prior to the council meeting.
If you want to follow along... Here are the links mentioned in the email.
Staff Suggested RFP
Public Records Access
Small Town Problems
No Contract No Problem
Where Are the Names
Here is the link for the text messages between myself and Audra. I posted those publicly as well, but the were attached to this email.
Ok all caught up.
I researched "Jim Levens" and this person does not exist. There is no voter registration. No home ownership. No Facebook account. No court/legal documents. Nothing.
So this is one of 3 things.
1) An anonymous email from someone behind the scenes that just put a random name to it to look legit.
2) This person actually lives in Crystal River and did not want to use their real name to shield from public disclosure
3) This person exists with this name but just does not have a digital footprint... does not vote... does not own a home... has had nothing filed with clerk of courts.
You can decide what you think.
Point is... someone is making sure the council knows about the text messages and how is bad for the city.
Here is where "Jim" got it wrong. I found all this stuff on my own. All those stories... I found them via records requests. No one was feeding me information. That is what people cannot believe. Everyone is convinced that there are people helping me find all this stuff.. They aren't. I know how to read and I know how to piece things together. I love the challenge. I know what rocks to turn over and all of that.
I may verify if I am on the right track... or keep someone informed of what I am doing/finding. I may ask someone questions to get answers faster, but all those answers are available publicly. Why dig through hours meetings if I can ask and get the answer in minutes? No one has shared information they are not allowed to share.
As for emailing a personal email address of a city official. Nothing illegal with that. So long as the official provides them according to public records laws, they can email on personal eemails. I have seen countless emails sent to/from personal emails, mostly by elected officials. I have never once questioned it so long as they do what is required by law.
The reason that legal suggests they do not use their personal emails is because it can cause problems if they delete something or do not retain it as required by law. Better to use county managed systems to avoid issues.
No different than text messages.
Speaking of... back to the behind the scenes stuff.
I did a records request for text messages between Ensing and former city manager/councilmember Ken Frink. He is also married to former councilmember Cindi Frink. Ken Frink is also a current school board member... but to be clear none of this is related to that.
Why him? Because I had reason to believe he is one of the people behind the scenes working to get rid of the city manager.
Here is what I was provided for this request. 56 text message screenshots between the two of them, going back to January 2025. Ensing took office December 2024, so all were in his role as councilmember and disclosed per public records laws.
These messages are very similar to what Curts and I were chatting about in our messages... things related to the city. Many of these messages were talking negatively about Curts and how she is doing a bad job. There is advice given by Frink to Ensing. There are questions about things....
Yet... Ensing states he has no confidence in the city manager because she texted someone outside the city?
Pot calling the kettle black? Using this logic, he has no confidence in himself, right?
To quote the Chronicle
"Ensing said he reviewed the communications through public records requests and characterized them as coaching and information-sharing that he believes crossed professional boundaries."
Did it cross professional boundaries to have text conversations with Ken Frink? I suppose you can argue one is an employee and one is an elected official, but the point remains... it is ok for him to do it, but not her?
If you want to read all 56 screenshots of texts, the link is below. I want to focus on a handful related to the city manager.
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/dm6ju9y0ku1xkht64cz7f/AKtNr2Aook3Tv3ftUeQmHPw?rlkey=6df974aitliv5vjayfyrsttii&st=lo34yps5&dl=0
Ken Frink is Gray. Ensing is blue.
This was Frink advising Ensing that Curts was making a bad decision on the Office Max building and suggesting she was doing it in a shady way.
Ensing asking Frink how they determine property tax valuations and how much revenue the city would lose if they purchased it. Does he not have staff that can answer that for him?
What is the point in sharing pictures taken of Curts and sharing them in a text message? But beyond that, Frink is helping Ensing get information about Curts' former employment, resume, etc.
If there is a story to tell, why was that not found in the interviews? Did the city not call former employers as part of the hiring process? Now Frink is making these calls to try to find out more on Curts... and sharing that with a council member?
This was sent after the meeting last week and the Chronicle published their story. Frink is supportive of Ensing's statement about losing confidence and thanked him for stating that.
But more interestingly, he goes on to tell Ensing that there is a large group of employees that are losing sleep because they have to work with her.
How in the world would he know that? He is talking to someone or someone is talking to him.
Are we going to question those conversations? It is ok for staff to talk to outside people, but wrong when the city manager does it?
There are more texts (link above), but you get the idea.
Again, to be clear, there is nothing illegal about this. Even though Frink is an elected official himself, he is not bound by sunshine law in conversations with Ensing as they do not serve on the same board. They can talk about anything they want to.
There is nothing wrong with texting either. So long as the elected official keeps the text messages as directed by state law and provides them as required when asked, nothing wrong with that either. They can text just about anyone they want to regarding just about anything they want.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of making a public statement of losing confidence in an employee because of text messages to a person outside the city... when that person is doing the exact same thing.
The difference... he can attempt to fire the employee... he cannot be fired himself, unless voters decide to do so in the next election.