Recent Articles

The Monumentally Moronic Mindlessness Of YouTube

It is time for Bellingham City Hall to take control by dumping YouTube for having taken down a video of a City Council meeting.

It is time for Bellingham City Hall to take control by dumping YouTube for having taken down a video of a City Council meeting.

[Update: 6:10 pm, Jul 24th.  I have learned from a reliable source that in Bellingham both committee meetings and the evening council meetings are housed on YouTube which is a part of the system, On Base/Hyland Software, that the city and many other governmental entities across the US use to manage the meetings and agendas.  It seems that this software uses YouTube which, in essence “forces” Bellingham meeting videos and other recordings to appear on the YouTube platform.  This is even more disquieting since YouTube essentially controls the viewing platform all our public video although the city ostensibly retains back-ups.  I note in a brief web search that not all users of On Base/Hyland Software are pushed onto YouTube as you will find with the City of Sioux Falls (click here) where the system does not seem to use YouTube. ] 

“The video of the July 12 regular meeting of the Bellingham City Council was removed from YouTube today (July 15, 2021) for violations of YouTube’s terms of service. (See YouTube’s COVID misinformation policy). The violation occurred as part of testimony shared by members of the public during the public comment period of the July 12 meeting.”   [From: YouTube removes July 12 City Council video due to content of public comments]

From what I see at the moment, this is a colossally ham-handed action by YouTube regarding what ought to be obvious even to the most obtuse reviewer: that this is a governmental meeting during which information is gathered and discussed; even incorrect, inane, dangerous, half-witted, or manifestly false information. If truth and fact were required in videos from the dais or commenter podiums of any legislative body on any topic whatsoever, then very few videos would ever get posted. Moreover, the U.S. Congress would have to cease operations, especially given the outright lies and misrepresentations that emanate from that body minute by minute. 

More importantly, why have we allowed ourselves to be held hostage by a private website in order to host public meeting and public record content? Is this a money saving measure the consequence of which is that we lose control of our own information? This lopsided and quasi-Faustian relationship ought to be re-examined and severely so. I note that all council committee meetings are posted to a local link at Why are the evening meetings of full council not available in the same manner? I have one suggestion to the city with respect to dealing with YouTube, an entity akin to a spoiled teenager whose wisdom must be acknowledged and whose every command must be obeyed. The sooner the city rids itself of this obnoxious appendage, the better.

[Note:  I am in NO WAY condoning the specific content of the highly questionable remarks on COVID that were presented during the public comment period on July 12th.  Most were tired, dangerous, and well-refuted claims that did not merit further exposure. But once said at a public meeting and recorded as a public record, the content cannot be altered. This includes the weird and inappropriate reference by commenter Natalie Chavez regarding a physician being “a humble Jewish doctor,” as if this stereotypical description had anything at all to do with expertise or COVID.]

As for our public comment period, it is a vital part of our council meetings. I have seen multiple attempts at constraining it over the past 20 years and all have failed miserably and justifiably so. One might compare restricting public comment to a water balloon when squeezed at one end: the water and pressure will migrate to another end until it bursts. I have personally spoken before council more times than I can remember over the last two decades.  Commenting is an opportunity for the public to reach out simultaneously to the council, mayor, staff, and the public without being filtered in any way. Alternatives such as email, letters, phone calls, or texts are just very, very poor substitutes.

From what I have read at the city website page YouTube removes July 12 City Council video due to content of public comments, it appears the council and I have similar thoughts as to the freedom of individuals to speak out at council meetings. This is encouraging. I am not enamored with the suspension of public commenting that has been declared for the 26 July council meeting, but I understand that the council needs to rethink the issues brought up by the mindless actions of YouTube. Perhaps council should consider a special meeting/hearing/town hall on these events in all their aspects. If not, as I said above, that water balloon will eventually burst. 

[NB: A video of a county council meeting was similarly removed from YouTube.  The county should take similar action and reclaim control over its official records.]

Related Links

Comments by Readers

David MacLeod

Jul 24, 2021

YouTube and much of the major social media (Facebook, Wikipedia, Linked-In, Vimeo, etc.) are doing this repeatedly across the board.  YouTube is taking down not only city council meetings but U.S. Senate testimony that does not match the narrative the CDC, the WHO, FDA, etc. are promoting.  A lot of what they’re taking down might be conspiracy theory bunk, but there is also very reputable, well credentialed scientists discussing science, and presenting scientific data.  

But as you said, this is not about the validity of the content, it is about flagrant censorship by private entities as a ham handed way of trying to control the narrative. It’s getting out of control 


Thomas R. Scott

Jul 25, 2021

David, I only disagree that it is “getting” out of control.  It is well past that point.

“Disappointing” is a kind way of putting it regarding the City and County depending on YouTube.  I have no problem that the City/County chose to save money by originally using this private entity.  However, once that entity started censoring content (in part or in whole), the City/County had a duty, required by law, to find another avenue to allow the public to see open meetings, even if it cost more to do so.

The Open Meetings law of this state requires public access to these meetings.  Given that the meetings are virtual, the public has further restricted access as it is.

Two days ago, I was told that the City is discontinuing public comment in response.  This is ineffective and infringes on the First Amendment right of citizens to “petition government”.  Again, this is exacerbated due to the virtual setting.  While a pro of virtual meetings is convenience for many and possibly actually providing more access (no longer having to squeeze into a barely ADA compliant setting), a definite con of the virtual setting is that it makes it far too easy for the public voice to be gagged.

If the public comment periods are stopped, that is one example of gagging the public at virtual meetings with little recourse.  It is wrong.


Jon Humphrey

Jul 26, 2021

Great article Dick, I am not going to let the council/mayor off of the hook though. I’ve met with almost all of them over the yaers, with the exception of Dan Hamill who refuses to learn anything new, and talked not just about fiber but issues like data security too. I remember specaifically mentioning to Lillquist, years ago, that free speech and privacy issues would arise if they used YouTube and that there is no need for them to since it’s easy for them to simply post the vidoes to their own site, as they used to by default and still do in some cases. It literally takes no extra effort. The standard video format that YouTube, and most services use (MP4), is just as easily handled by an internal COB server as YouTube. The council should have held IT staff accountable for suggesting such a bad, anti-first amendment, solution but instead they took our rights away instead. I mean think about it, they didn’t just ban speech on COVID Vaccines while they re-evaluated, they banned ALL SPEECH. Again, they used to run their own media server for all of this. Guess it was setup back when the COB had more competant leadership in IT who cared about the little things like the constitution. Also, who the hell is Hannah to remind us that we technically, “don’t have a right to public commentary?” That sounds like fascism to me. 

Remember when Eric Johnston tried NOT to record Braodband Advisory Group meetings, claiming it was too hard to do when Zoom litearlly automatically makes a video at the end of the meeting? Councilmember Anderson believed his “extra staff hours” fables, but the truth is it doesn’t take extra effort and they’re always looking for excuses not to be transperant. Funny how this is all happening the week after the COBs exposure with desecrating native American reamins and polluting Padden Creek to appease developers was exposed. Eric Johnston was fired for doing the same thing in Oak Harbor and lying to the council and mayor about it. How did he become our public works director again?

In closing, running their own media server is easy and always what they should have done to protect our rights. The COB does the same thing with forcing people to get Microsoft accounts now just to get public records from requests. They could simply run and manage their own server for that too and used to. It all comes down to lazy, incompetant, overpaid, upper-echelon staff at the COB trying to make everything corporate. Especailly our data.


Dick Conoboy

Jul 26, 2021


The city has subordinated its rights to a private platform that has the right to remove any content it doesn’t like.  Facebook, Twitter, etc. all claim that right to eliminate content and most agreed with that that when Trump and his ilk were banned from this, that or the other private platform.  Now it has come home to bite us when we have purposely allowed the city to place itself in the position of being just a customer who can be dealt with as the corporation pleases.  We must remove ourselves from YouTube.  


Jon Humphrey

Jul 26, 2021

I agree we must remove ourselves from YouTube, but this alone is not enough. We need technically competent leadership in our government that would not have put us in this position in the first place and that includes on the council and preferably a technically competent mayor too. And no to the Corporate Democrats, Michael Lilliquist is not a tech expert, even when he tells you he is. Yes, he is smart, but I have never seen anyone use their intelligence against the people quite like Michael and being smart alone does not make one a tech expert. You need experience too. The rest of the council should have had enough sense to take, or seek, objective opinions on their use of technology especially when related to free speech issues.

People know I am not a Trump fan, but I always am annoyed when anyone’s right to free speech is violated. It’s always Orwellian. We can argue the necessity of removing speech if it’s truly unsafe or creates an unsafe situation, but it’s always Orwellian to some extent to do so. Let Trump, Ben Shapiro, etc. make asses of themselves, in fact make some popcorn first. As adults we should have enough common sense to seek multiple sources of information before making decisions anyway. Is YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, etc. a parent to all of us now even individuals with high level collegiate degrees in our government? Do we wait for them to tell us what we are allowed to consider, say and listen to? Are we gerbils ladies and gentlemen?  



Dana Briggs

Jul 30, 2021

I sent this to the city and county on JKuly 22:

I have read the information provided at and this is my input:

  1. It should not be surprising that YouTube (YT), a private company as you point out, would interpret their rules in an overly broad way mainly, if not solely, to their advantage. Just as Twitter banned the former President for misinformation, YT did the same to the city. Granted, the former President was in control of his comments and you were not in control of what might be said by any individual other than yourself. So, YT obviously did not take that into account.
  2. The reliance of the COB and other governmental agencies to use YT as a distribution platform for archival and live broadcast purposes, and in many cases solely, did not absolve the COB of the responsibility of having an alternative “just in case”. YT is not C-SPAN or TVW, and has no legal obligation to fully or even partially archive or permit broadcast of public (governmental) information.
  3. Even if you consider BTV as the alternative, it is inconvenient because not everyone can watch the live broadcast thru the COB web site, and inaccessible for archival purposes for those without “cable”. I appreciate that the effort has been made to move the July 12 video and others to a different platform. Which leads me to the following proposals—
  • A city funded platform whether new, or an enhanced BTV, needs to be established for live and archived video and audio broadcasts of all public meetings,
  • Perhaps this can be done in conjunction with the county and six small municipalities as a central location for all things governmental,
  • It needs to be staffed to provide “bleeping” (editing) profanity because, as we all realize, every other comment and discussion is valid, and
  • While we’re at it, all video broadcasts need to be close captioned for our hearing impaired community. The live BTV and archived YT broadcasts are not always close captioned.

I’m sure you’ll find the right solution. However, even with every other item on your official plates, there needs to be urgency to getting this done and funded, and wean the COB off YT.


Dick Conoboy

Jul 31, 2021

The two issues raised in my article, the use of YouTube and the question of public commenting at council meetings will be discussed by the committee of the whole on Monday afternoon, 2 August.  Click here to go to the agenda.

My article has been sent to all the city and county council members, the mayor and the county executive.


Dick Conoboy

Jul 31, 2021


As I understand the association with YouTube it is that YouTube is the platform that is used by On Base/Hyland Software which provides the agenda management software for (unfortunately) us and government entities across the US.  As with many digital program purchased or rented the user is often unaware what is attached to the software.  It is like buying underwear and finding out that the cloth is permeated with undisclosed and noxious chemicals.  And if you complain (as we did to YouTube) you will find that you aren’t allowed to do so according the the 10,000 page user agreement that no human being could ever interpret… even a lawyer.   😊


The Monumentally Moronic Mindlessness Of YouTube

By Dick ConoboyOn Jul 24, 2021

It is time for Bellingham City Hall to take control by dumping YouTube for having taken down a video of a City Council meeting.

8 comments, most recent 1 year ago

County Council Plays Politics With Our Judges

By John ServaisOn Jul 21, 2021

The Whatcom County Council is afraid to make an appointment of a temporary District Court judge before the Primary Election. Is the “fix” in?

1 comment, most recent 1 year ago

North State Street Dormitory Open for Business Fall 2021

By Guest WriterOn Jul 17, 2021

Yet another eyesore bunker-like building for bunking students at market rental rates.

3 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Massive Excavation in Archeological Zone Permitted by City Hall

By Tip JohnsonOn Jul 15, 2021

The city granted building permits while the Planning Department knew this was a state historical Indian village site.

2 comments, most recent 1 year ago

City Hall is Third World

By John ServaisOn Jul 13, 2021

Bellingham website goes dead with one person taking a few days off. So much for an administration and a system. Third world government.

4 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Bye, Felicia

By Jon HumphreyOn Jul 12, 2021

Effective, efficient and low cost, high speed broadband service continues to elude Bellingham and Whatcom County

5 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Aliens Return Fairhaven’s Mail Collection Box

By Dick ConoboyOn Jul 07, 2021

Bellingham continues to have its mail dropoff options changed willy-nilly.

3 comments, most recent 1 year ago

CityView Private Dormitory Proposal Moving Into Third Year Of Consideration

By Dick ConoboyOn Jul 06, 2021

Time to put the kibosh on the CityView private dormitory project for the good of the neighborhood and the good of the city.

Letter:  Petition to Ban Teaching Critical Race Theory

By Letter WriterOn Jul 04, 2021

Riley and Bryna Sweeney write about the petition to ban the teaching of Critical Race Theory in the Meridian School District.

The basics of Mayor Fleetwood’s attack on the Municipal Court

By John ServaisOn Jul 02, 2021

How Mayor Fleetwood and his city attorneys are violating the basic laws that our nation was founded and built upon.

5 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Bellingham City Attorneys Removed from Muni Court Case by Judge

By John ServaisOn Jul 01, 2021

City attorney James Erb removed from legal case against Judge Lev for conflict of interest by Superior Court judge.

6 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Aliens Abduct Bellingham Mail Collection Box

By Dick ConoboyOn Jun 26, 2021

Mail collection boxes seem to be a thing of the past. Why have one postal vehicle collect from the boxes when hundreds of people can drive to the post office to mail a letter?

3 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Whatcom Citizens for Responsible Technology

By Jon HumphreyOn Jun 26, 2021

A new and local county wide technology group of Internet and broadband experts has been formed. Jon explains why and lists the members.

2 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Letter: Municipal Court Controversy

By Letter WriterOn Jun 24, 2021

Mary Kay Becker writes about the Bellingham Municipal Court Controversy

Bellingham Council Starts Process to Abolish Municipal Court

By John ServaisOn Jun 21, 2021

Tonight the Bellingham City Council - with no agenda notice - authorized the mayor to begin process to abolish the Bellingham Municipal Court

4 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Save the Whales - Bellingham’s $40mm Padden Creek Joke

By Tip JohnsonOn Jun 19, 2021

What does a little stream matter? Spoiler alert! It’s not a joke and, if it were, it would not be a nice one.

5 comments, most recent 1 year ago

District Judge David Grant Resigns

By John ServaisOn Jun 03, 2021

The presiding judge of Whatcom County District Court has suddenly resigned effective July first.

5 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Memorial Day 2021

By Dick ConoboyOn May 30, 2021

A day to remember the US service men and women who have passed away.

6 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Bellingham Municipal Court Judge Lev Sues the City

By John ServaisOn May 28, 2021

Debra Lev, Bellingham’s municipal court judge, is suing Mayor Seth Fleetwood and the city

7 comments, most recent 1 year ago

Your Chance NOW to Weigh In on the CityView Private Dormitory Development

By Dick ConoboyOn May 27, 2021

City staff report outlines “issues” with megalithic CityView complex. You have a chance to comment.

1 comment, most recent 1 year ago