April 29, 2010

Update: City administrator responds to Ethics Committee's emailed report

Irony, thy name is Ethics Committee.

The committee that oversees the city's ethics policy is conducting business by email, according to minutes of the committee's last meeting. The committee voted April 14 to review its annual report to the City Council and the Mayor's office by email.

Chairman Mary Wyant told committee members she will "generate" the annual report and email it to committee members for review before submitting it to the council and the Mayor. The committee, apparently, will not review or vote on its annual report at a public meeting. That's likely a violation of the state open meetings law.

Ethics Committee members at the April 14 meeting included: Wyant, Jay Christie, Diana Valencia and Doug Nicholson. Committee member Russell Missurelli was absent.

Former Alderman Pete Karas, a hawk for open government, brought the committee's actions to RacinePost's attention.

The Ethics Committee isn't the first city committee to conduct business by email. Last year, the city's Loan Board of Review was forced to change its procedures after it was discovered committee members were voting by email.

Here's the full report in the Ethics Committee meeting minutes:
10-4922 Subject: (Direct Referral) Discussion of report to be filed with Mayor and Common Council no later than May 1, 2010 concerning its actions in the preceding calendar year.

Recommendation of the Board of Ethics on 4-14-10: That the Chairman generate the report and send to the Common Council before May 1, 2010.

Fiscal Note: N/A

Chairman Wyant stated she will generate the report and e-mail to committee members for review before submitting to the Common Council.

Received and Filed
Update: City Administrator Tom Friedel sent over the following update about the Ethics Committee:
Please add an update that no members of the board found a need to contact the chairman with any corrections to the report. The report, as approved by the board, is attached to the agenda for the next city council meeting on Tuesday. Your statement that, “ The committee, apparently, will not review or vote on its annual report at a public meeting” is misleading. Had there been a need to make corrections or changes, the chairman would have called another meeting before sending the report to the common council.

I’m surprised that a veteran reporter like you did not offer the chairman of the board an opportunity to comment on the story before you indicted the board for conducting business by email. Conducting business is a very broad term that, by itself, would not constitute a violation of the open meetings law.
Here's the response I sent to Friedel:
Hi Tom,

Thank you for the update. I'll post it with the story.

I'm surprised the city is OK with even the suggestion of a committee doing anything by email. I know this is a minor instance, but it's pretty clear under state law that committee members shouldn't vote or discuss issues by email. If we wouldn't have brought attention to this instance, we would have had no way of knowing if the report was emailed, if changes were requested or if the committee accepted the report. It's the same thing as the Loan Board voting by email. There's no public accountability when actions occur outside of official meetings.

You're free to think whatever you'd like about my reporting skills. But I'm going to keep bringing up these instances, and I may rely solely on the official minutes of meetings to do so.
Update 2: I just got a call from someone not happy with this story. Their point, basically, was the members of the committee are good people who are volunteering their time to take part in city government. It's an absolutely fair point. Volunteer committee members give up their time and effort at little personal benefit and should be thanked for their service.

I'd add that under no circumstance was this a major violation of the Open Meetings Law, if it was a violation at all. We're talking about pretty minor stuff here. But our job is to be hyper-vigilant about city officials governing in the open, and when we see official committee reports being emailed around without final approval from the committee, we get concerned.

That said, all other business the Ethics Committee conducted at its April 14 meetings looks to be on the up-and-up, and we've never heard any other concerns about their actions. It's a good group, I just wish they wouldn't have sent that report out by email.

27 comments:

  1. Again, more reasons the RacinePost will never be considered serious journalism. Is it news? Is it commentary? Is "Irony, thy name is Ethics Committee" a sophomoric attempt at literary prose? You said: "Chairman Mary Wyant told committee members she will "generate" the annual report and email it to committee members for review before submitting it to the council and the Mayor."
    Query: By puttng the word "generate" in quotes do you suggest that Ms. Wyant is lying about how the report will be created? If it is intended to be a drect quotation from Ms. Wyant, were there other words that she specifically used that should be in quotes as well? The minutes say she used the word "email." Why is that not in quotes in your item?
    The biggest problem is the collosal leap of logic. You said: "The committee, apparently, will not review or vote on its annual report at a public meeting. That's likely a violation of the state open meetings law."
    Presumably, you don't mean to say that not reviewing or voting on something is a likely violation of the open meetings law, although such is the logic of those two sentences. You can't honestly believe that no committee member may read and consider the report unless he or she is in a public forum. Your leap is that you seem to be suggesting that the fact that the report is distributed to the committee members will inevitably result in some sort of official action being taken via private backroom email conversation. There is no suggestion in the minutes that such will happen. It is much more likely that, if a committee member sees a problem, a special meeting will be called. You are aware that special meetings may be called, aren't you? You are aware that committee members may speak to each other to ask for a special meeting, aren't you?
    Inasmuch as there is no by line in this story, we're uncertain who wrote this. Which ever one of you it was, perhaps you should think before you write. Maybe the Racine Post should hire an editor to review stories before they are published. A blogger saying to himself, "I think this should be written and published" does not turn the absence of news into news, and it does not turn commentary into journalism.
    You do and should have the right to distribute this kind of information. At least be honest and stop pretending you are journalists.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Post is always in bed with that pot head.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 8:57: "You can't honestly believe that no committee member may read and consider the report unless he or she is in a public forum. "

    I don't think it is about reading and considering -- it is about taking action, i.e. approving or discussing the report in secrecy before it goes to the City Council -- Not sure that is legal....

    ReplyDelete
  4. No By Lines,

    It is Mrs. Wyant not Ms. Wyant. That being said, I would bet every dollar that Dustin and Pete have that this is not an open meetings violation. Mary and her husband are Attorneys and I feel it hard to believe that they would over look that possibility.

    ReplyDelete
  5. would they overlook the fact that Doug Nicholson serves on several city commissions and also is a vendor with business contracts with the city?

    ReplyDelete
  6. 10:00 - What business contracts with the city?

    ReplyDelete
  7. No by line = PIO ??
    Will this report be read at a public meeting with comments from public?

    ReplyDelete
  8. 8:57 - The key is they won't review or vote on the report at a public meeting. It seems to gall some people that public business has to be done at meetings that the public can actually attend. We'll ridicule a public body every time there is even the suggestion that they are conducting the public's business in secrecy.

    While there's about 10 people in the city who seem to care about open government (Karas being one of them), the rules are really important. If left unchecked, more and more business is done in private with no input from city residents.

    As journalists, we're stupid enough to believe that the public has a right to know. We make no claims or endeavors to being "serious" journalists. We just want city committee to follow the rules so everyone can see what's going on, not just a select few.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Mary and her husband are Attorneys and I feel it hard to believe that they would over look that possibility."

    I laughed so hard that my tongue almost snapped off its roller! Seriously anon 9:56, nothing personal but if you think lawyers are pillars of knowledge - and ethical conduct - you are up for Ignoramus of the Year.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It sounds like the group was going to use email to finalize a document for presentation to the city council. Developing a working document in email is not an open records violation. Working documents under development are expressly stated as not being open records. Once the document is presented, accepted or approved by the City Council that version becomes a public record.

    I'm not a lawyer or associated with any of these people. I just know how to read the law and this isn't a violation.

    It is becoming to common to believe Pete Karas when he raises these flags. You may notice that none of his claims have been proven to be real issues. Before publishing these things get another opinion other than Karas.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anon 12:02 -- I believe you are confusing open records law with open meetings law.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Laws are made to be broken!

    ReplyDelete
  13. So sayeth the propaganda wing of the Cory Mason campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The story of Jim Spodick and city loan was reported.There was not a update on the outcome which was settled but never reported by journal or Post!Why report a story if you are not going to follow through.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dustin - thank you for reporting on things when no one else will!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Yea - Dustin thanks for getting in bed with the pot head.

    ReplyDelete
  17. PR 8:57, you say that the committee's actions were "likely a violation of the state open meetings law." Falling back on your vast legal knowledge and experience, state specifically what the committee did that was a violation. Don't speculate as to what might or could happen. What, exactly, was the violation?

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is the way the Dickerts do business, it is nothing new.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 3:58....The truth. This is nothing new for Dickert and his folks in CIty Hall. They assume all our stupid, look how many times they have been embarresed over the past year.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Tim the Shrubber4/30/2010 8:19 PM

    "I'd add that under no circumstance was this a major violation of the Open Meetings Law, if it was a violation at all."

    So, it may not be a violation? Then why did you originally write "That's likely a violation of the state open meetings law."

    Sounds to me like y'all just trashed some people without the basis to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "They assume all our stupid, look how many times they have been embarresed over the past year. "

    Gee, why on earth would anyone assume that?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Lets give everyone in City Hall a pass on anything after all they are nice folks.
    Why so serious?

    ReplyDelete
  24. You want a guide for open government? See this link:

    http://www.rcfp.org/ogg/index.php?op=browse&state=WI

    It includes Open Meeting and Open Records info.

    This was prepared by the folks at Foley & Lardner LLP in Milwaukee. The attorneys that only the Johnson's can afford.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Please add an update that no members of the board found a need to contact the chairman with any corrections to the repor

    Does that mean that everyone on the comittee emailed back that they agree with the report as is ?? or does voteing by silence mean its ok ??

    ReplyDelete
  26. A dickert administration is just more of the same. Giving jobs and no bid contracts to his friends, rewarding campaign donors and supporters, trying to buy off his opponents with jobs and contracts (look at the real estate deals), giving taxdollars to a friend for a fraudulent lawsuit, failing to bring any jobs to Racine, businesses leaving, and unemployment almost doubling.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anon 7:53, you nailed it. The sad thing is, as Anon 7:34 and Anon 8:21 note, the people of Racine are so stupid that in the next election they will most probably re-elect dickert based on name recognition rather than on the issues and his abominable track record. Have you received your recycle bin yet?

    ReplyDelete