How petty can the smartest person in the room get?

If his actions at the July 22, 2025, meeting of the Branson Board of Aldermen (Board) are any clue, about as petty as a person can get.

At that meeting, during the discussion of BILL NO. 6566 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 94-8 OF THE BRANSON MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO SUBDIVISIONS Alderman Schulz said:

“The only request I’d have potentially, just for a second reading, is to ask our city attorney to take another look at the wording of paragraph c i because the punctuation in there and just the wording of ‘and approved by the board of aldermen’ just doesn’t flow together I think in the intent that it was designed to be. It doesn’t really say that this had to be previously approved by the board of aldermen. I think adding the word “previous” would be very beneficial, and then rework the punctuation. I’m happy to approve it for a first reading tonight but just ask that our city staff take a look at that and try to beef that paragraph up a little bit.”

The “paragraph” Schultz is referring to is in reality a new proposed sub-paragraph ( b)(1) c.(i) of Section 94-8. It reads, “The city may approve additional minor subdivisions – exceeding one split but not more than three splits – when a development requiring an additional minor subdivision is designed to alleviate housing supply shortages in the city and such housing developments which is credited or funded in whole, or in part by federal or state government agencies or programs and approved by the board of aldermen.”

“But Seagull, there is nothing wrong with that sentence, and to gripe about punctuation and adding the word ‘previous’ seems pretty petty. Could you tell me why an alderman would concern themselves about something so petty, let alone make it a public matter at a Board meeting?”

“Sure, this alderman appears to thrive by using his position to point out any mistakes, real or imagined, that staff makes to create the perception that without his magnificence and correction, the city would be in deep trouble regarding the issue. He takes every public chance to show that he is the smartest man in the room.

“Even at that, why would the alleged smartest man in the room ply his trade on something that is not wrong and, even if it was wrong, something so petty?” “Because he is who he is, and he can use his position as alderman to espouse even something this petty to get administration and the Board to approve his actions.”

“Why do you say that?” “Because the city attorney then asked Schulz, “Alderman, just for the point of clarity, you’re talking about the first paragraph, right?” Schulz replied, “Paragraph on the revised version of this paragraph c. i where it’s specific. I’ll just give [you] what it says there now so we’re clear, ‘When the development requiring additional minor, subdivision is designed to alleviate a housing supply shortages and the city in such housing developments, which credited or funded in whole or in part by federal law, or state government agencies are programs and approved by the board of alderman.’ I think we just could spiff that up a bit.”

“Well, that doesn’t imply that the Board will entertain his pettiness.” “No, but the attorney’s reply to Schulz’s comments, ‘Yeah, I’ve got it; we’ll take care of it,’ does.”

“Seagull, do you believe that if anyone else had made the same comments Schulz made to the Board during the Public Hearing on that same item, the city attorney would have asked for further clarification and, after receiving it, would have said, ‘We’ll take care of it?’” “Surely that’s a rhetorical question, but just in case it isn’t, the answers to your two questions are ‘No’ and ‘No.’”

“Then why do you think the attorney said, ‘We’ll take care of it’ after Schulz clarifies his pettiness?” “Because of Schulz’s position as an alderman.”

“Wait, Seagull, are you saying that the city administration and Board will actually condone and endorse the Schulz’s pettiness and the precedent it establishes?” “No, but the tape of the meeting shows there’s an excellent chance of that happening.”

The record establishes just how petty the smartest man in the room can get. An Ole Seagull’s prayer is that the Board will not lower itself to the same level of pettiness.