I think a public records foya request would prove that miester is a liar. He said police and fire were fully staffed, yet they have unfilled and refunded positions. The council preaching about public safety actually defended the police and fire for a battleship and phallic monument to repay the political action people like Wells and Flowers that apparently got them elected. Blessings of liberty, more like blm defund the police agenda. Wolves in sheep’s clothing.

The decision by City Council to close the armory in March to people experiencing homelessness was not simply a matter of logistics or budgets. It was a moral choice—and one that exposes the growing disconnect between the religious rhetoric some council members use and the values they claim to represent.

Council Members Rivas, McKervey, and Meister frequently frame their leadership in terms of faith and “Christian values.” Yet when confronted with the real, human need for shelter—especially during cold nights—they chose to shut the door. That choice aligns less with the teachings of Jesus and more with the behavior of the Sadducees, the religious elites of Jesus’s time who prioritized rules, authority, and appearances over mercy.

Jesus consistently challenged leaders who used religion to justify exclusion. He fed the hungry, sheltered the vulnerable, and warned against those who burdened the poor while protecting their own power. He did not ask the unhoused to solve their problems before offering compassion. He did not tell them to go somewhere else. He certainly did not close doors in their faces.

What makes the armory closure especially troubling is that the city had options. This same council majority found money for expensive pet projects—an elaborate playground and a monument designed to impress rather than serve. Funds were readily approved for these vanity projects while a basic, temporary shelter was deemed expendable.

Those dollars could have kept the armory open while permanent solutions were pursued. They could have covered staffing, security, sanitation, and coordination with service providers. Instead, the council chose symbolism over survival, spectacle over shelter.

This raises an unavoidable question: what values are truly guiding these decisions? Because prioritizing monuments while displacing vulnerable people is not fiscal responsibility, and it is not Christian compassion.

Faith, if it is to mean anything in public service, must show up in action. Using religion as a shield for harsh policies is not leadership—it is hypocrisy. Jesus spoke harshly about religious leaders who claimed righteousness while neglecting the suffering around them.

Porterville deserves better. We deserve leaders who govern with empathy, humility, and common sense—leaders who understand that caring for the least among us is not optional. It is the measure of who we are.