Since late January, a fractioned Orem City council has been dealing with the ramifications of pursuing a split from the Alpine School District. No one reading this would be surprised to hear that this has produced a lot of conflicts — we only have to look to the recent Canyons and Jordan District to remind ourselves of the resulting drama.

There have been countless concerns about the split from varying perspectives, and both groups have had good observations.

Here is mine. The issue that I find most alarming isn’t the split; it isn’t how the council majority initiated it by striking fast, hoping to slip it under the radar in an assumed attempt to suppress potential opposition. My concern is how the very vocal pro-splitters have embraced an unsavory culture almost void of decorum and respect for those who don’t align with their position.

A no vote is voting yes to remind elected officials that the council seats are politically neutral by design and not an appendage of any political party.

It will remind them that using their position to create a carnival game rigged in their favor, neglecting best practices, and normalizes uncivil discourse will not be validated with your vote.

Even if the proposal is agreeable to you, the use of unfair practices and manipulation in attempts to strong-arm a win should not become the acceptable way that Orem gets things done.

Breaking the tradition of remaining neutral as a council body, ignoring standard RFP practices in selecting the company to perform the study, not including parents, educators, and the very district they will have to arbitrate with to the table, feeling at liberty to talk unprofessionally and demeaningly to residents, elected board members, and fellow council members are all methods to get what they want while skirting the very ethics Orem and her people stand proudly by.

It’s become a more significant discussion than a split; it’s now a test of what we will tolerate in city leadership.

The New York Times, in an opinion piece regarding the Supreme Court of the United States, was published on the first of this month. A particular comment stood out to me.

“For most of the court’s history, it was difficult to predict how a case would turn out based on the party of the president who nominated the justices. Even into the 21st century, as the country grew more polarized, the court’s rulings remained largely in line with the views of the average American voter. That is no longer the case.”

I was amazed at how closely that reflected our current situation. We know before every motion and hearing how it will turn out. Some will ask what’s wrong with that. What’s wrong with it is the council majority is no longer concerned about representation. They are agenda-driven, and that is a problem. The city council was designed as a council of 7, not as a reality show that puts alliances ahead of representation.

Cathy Ambrose is a former four-time PTA President and is the Executive Director of Hope4Orem, a nonprofit that provides funding for suicide prevention curricula to schools in Orem or schools that feed into Orem.