Davin Pickell has been a busy man. He’s filed ethics complaints against the Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, Mayor’s Staff Paraino, Tom Carto, Dierdre Garton, Council President Mark Clear, Council Pro Tem Lauren Cnare and Council Office Staff Lisa Veldran. The Ethics Board hasn’t seen this many complaints in at least 15 years, there’s 16 of them!
Here’s the Complaints the the gist of why they were filed:
Tom Carto
Complaint
On Friday October 22″“, 2010, at 12:16 p.m. Deirdre Garton sent out an to an (the?) Overture Center for the Arts mailing list, presumably using a City computer, and/or the City computer network, and/or letterhead generated by City of Madison Employees while working for the City of Madison. The e-mail was a privileged use of City owned equipment, a City operated computer network, and was delivered to a mailing list compiled by City employees, using letterhead presumably generated by City employees.
Ms. Garton is primarily a private citizen, with private interests, including private interests currently before the Common Council. As the chair the board of the Privately operated 201 State St. Foundation, she has a personal interest in the outcome of the public policy decision. Tom Carto, as President and CEO of Overture Center for the Arts, and as a City Employee, bears ultimate responsibility for letting his other employer, 201 State St. Foundation’s chair Deirdre Garton, use City owned equipment to lobby support for a Public Policy issue currently before the Madison Common Council.
Her sending out an emailed correspondence whatsoever appears to be a violation of 3.35(5)(b), as such a right is not available to the public generally, and as far as I’rn aware, the message, or the use of the various City properties was not approved, in advance, by the Common Council, regardless of the content of the e-mail. Mr. Carto’s facilitating such an act would appear to be, by extension, a violation of the Ethics Code as well.
The political rallying cry encouraging subscribers to weigh in on a public policy matter, with incomplete information, and with a misrepresentation of the truth therein contained simply exacerbates such an ethics violation.
I have a copy of a forwarded version of the e-mail, but as such, I can’t authenticate the integrity of the message contained therein. I would suggest a polite request or an open records request would put the integrity question to rest, before moving on to the ethical issues.
Dierdre Garton
Complaint
On Friday October 22″“, 2010, at 12:16 p.m. Deirdre Garton sent out an to an (the?) Overture Center for the Arts mailing list, presumably using a City computer, and/or the City computer network, and/or letterhead generated by City of Madison Employees while working for the City of Madison. The e-mail was a privileged use of City owned equipment, a City operated computer network, and was delivered to a mailing list compiled by City employees, using letterhead presumably generated by City employees.
Ms. Garton is primarily a private citizen, with private interests, including private interests currently before the Common Council. As the chair the board of the Privately operated 201 State St. Foundation, she has a personal interest in the outcome of the public policy decision.
Her sending out an emailed correspondence whatsoever appears to be a violation of 3.35(5)(b), as such a right is not available to the public generally, and as far as I’rn aware, the message, or the use of the various City properties was not approved, in advance, by the Common Council, regardless of the content of the e-mail. Mr. Carto’s facilitating such an act would appear to be, by extension, a violation of the Ethics Code as well.
The political rallying cry encouraging subscribers to weigh in on a public policy matter, with incomplete information, and with a misrepresentation of the truth therein contained simply exacerbates such an ethics violation.
I have a copy of a forwarded version of the e-mail, but as such, I can’t authenticate the integrity of the message contained therein. I would suggest a polite request or an open records request would put the integrity question to rest, before moving on to the ethical issues.
Mayor Dave
Complaint
On Thursday August 19th, 2010, the first meeting of the Overture Ad Hoc Committee commenced by skipping over the statutorily required public comment period completely [M.G.O. 33.01(9)(b)], in the form of an agenda item for that night’s meeting.
Moving on to the ‘Business’ at hand, City of Madison Mayor Cieslewicz opened the meeting by delivering his ‘charge,’ [19524 Committee Charge from Mayor Dave Cieslewicz] in which he stated, among other things, that:
“He hoped to have a report to the Common Council by October 19, 2010. He stated that the Overture Center carried a $28 million debt and that issue has not been resolved (despite what the papers report) and will not be resolved until the Common Council votes to take over the building. If he cannot convince the Council to take over the building the city taxpayers would be potentially liable for $6 million (or more) in 2011.”
The $28,000,000 debt that the Mayor spoke of is a privately held debt, currently in the name of Overture Development Corporation, I believe.
The Mayor was speaking in advocacy of Common Council endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently negotiated to facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here.
On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken by Mayor Cieslewicz in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, by virtue of an Advisory Opinion issued by the City of Madison Ethics Board on October 15, 2010, regarding Soliciting Funds for a Conference, which stated, in part:
The Ethics Board determines that solicitation of funds from entities which either are regulated by the City or regularly do business with the City would violate sec. 3.35(5)(a) 2, because the Mayor would be “solicit[ing]…from any person or entity…anything of value…” and that solicitation in this case “could reasonably be expected to influence the incumbent’s vote, official actions, or judgment…”
The specifics of the Names and Dollar Amounts of the promised “donations,” from the various ‘angel donors,’ and an analysis of their current roles, if any, on the boards of any of the interested parties, or their employment status with any of the interested parties, or their other influential relationships with any of the interested parties will help establish who, if anyone, is similarly guilty of violating of the City of Madison Ethics code, and this will also help establish the record of why this instance of the Mayor soliciting funds is an obviously more egregious viloation of section 3.35(5)(a)2 than the proposed circumstance opined upon by the Ethics Board in their 10/15/10 Advisory Opinion.
I’m not even sure, given the existing Advisory Opinion, whether a further determination is necessary, by the Ethics Board, but welcome the opportunity to see justice served, and Ethics prevail.
Janet Piraino
Complaint
On June 3,2010 Mayoral Chief of Staff Janet Piraino stood before a collected mass of Overture Center employees, in the Wisconsin Studio at Overture Center for the Arts.
In conjunction with Tom Carto, and Head of City Human Resources Brad Wirtz, Ms . Piraino et al. advocated for employees to contact their Alders and help persuade their Alders to vote for the Privatization of their jobs, without even any clue or commitment or detail shared as to what the privatization bloodbath would look like for them, as employees.
The now well known threat of `The Abyss’ was bantied about by one or more Privatization Cheerleaders that day, in an effort to line up the support of not only Overture employees, but also the support of friends and family, and neighbors.
The complainant approached Ms . Piraino after said meeting and indicated that a review of the plan, as it currently existed, would be necessary before employees started rallying the troops of support, and expressed several concerns that employees currently had, and why they might be reluctant to support such a plan devised by their lack of leadership.
The Mayor’s Chief of Staff subsequently and expediently didn’t bother to do anything much with the concerns expressed, but she was willing to convince Overture management to promptly and publicly share the details of said agreement a brief 75 days later, plus or minus, when the AMS Focus Model was released on or about August 27, 2010 . It is suggested by some that the Focus Model had been on summer hiatus, and was thus unavailable for scrutinization.
It was a shame . It still is. I think .
Mark Clear
Complaint, 2, 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3
One
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice
it to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would
be, in fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, by virtue of an Advisory Opinion issued by the City of Madison Ethics Board on October 15, 2010, regarding Soliciting Funds for a Conference, which stated, in part:
The Ethics Board determines that solicitation of funds from entities which either are regulated by the City or regularly do business with the City would violate sec. 3.35(5)(a) 2, because the Mayor would be “solicit[ing]…from any person or entity…anything of value…” and that solicitation in this case “could reasonably be expected to influence the incumbent’s vote, official actions, or judgment…”
The specifics of the Names and Dollar Amounts of the promised amounts, from the various ‘angel donors,’ and an analysis of their current roles, if any, on the boards of any of the interested parties, or their employment status with any of the interested parties, or their other influential relationships with any of the interested parties will help establish who, if anyone, is similarly guilty of violation of the City of Madison Ethics code, and also will establish the record of why this instance of the Council leadership negotiating the terms and conditions of satisfaction of this forbearance agreement is an obviously more egregious violation of section 3.35(5)(a)2 than is the proposed circumstance opined upon by the Ethics Board in their 10/15/10 Advisory Opinion.
I’m not even sure, given the existing Advisory Opinion, whether a further determination is necessary, by the Ethics Board, but welcome the opportunity to see justice served, and Ethics prevail, a lot.
Two
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it
to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in
fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:
Use of Office or Position. No incumbent may use or attempt to use her or his position or office to obtain financial gain or anything of value or any advantage, privilege or treatment for the private benefit of herself or himself or her or his immediate family, or for an organization with which she or he is associated.
At the end of the game of Six Degrees of Separation, thus applied, it might be suggested that if the Mayor’s assertion regarding the economic interest the City has in the outcome of this third party transaction/$1 short-sale hybrid is not a lie, then Alders Clear and Cnare may have engaged in negotiating the terms and conditions of something of value, either to outside interests, or of benefit for an organization with which she or he is associated: the City of Madison.
2.1 (appears to be the same as Two)
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it
to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in
fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:
Use of Office or Position. No incumbent may use or attempt to use her or his position or office to obtain financial gain or anything of value or any advantage, privilege or treatment for the private benefit of herself or himself or her or his immediate family, or for an organization with which she or he is associated.
At the end of the game of Six Degrees of Separation, thus applied, it might be suggested that if the Mayor’s assertion regarding the economic interest the City has in the outcome of this third party transaction/$1 short-sale hybrid is not a lie, then Alders Clear and Cnare may have engaged in negotiating the terms and conditions of something of value, either to outside interests, or of benefit for an organization with which she or he is associated: the City of Madison.
2.2
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in fact, “anything of value.”
On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:
They shall not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so, and shall work in full cooperation with others unless prohibited from so doing by law or by officially recognized confidentiality of their work.
At the end of the game of Six Degrees of Separation, thus applied, it might be suggested that if the Mayor’s assertion regarding the economic interest the City has in the outcome of this third party transaction/$1 short-sale hybrid is not a lie, then Alders Clear and Cnare may have engaged in negotiating the terms and conditions of something of value, either to outside interests, or of benefit for an organization with which she or he is associated: the City of Madison.
2.3
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it
to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in
fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:
They shall not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so, and shall work in full cooperation with others unless prohibited from so doing by law or by officially recognized confidentiality of their work.
I believe that engaging in negotiations with Private parties regarding the wages, benefits, and working conditions of unionized municipal employees, without the presence of the bargaining unit representatives of said Unions, and/or their legal counsel present at such negotiations, short of their refusal to attend said negotiations after proper and legal notification of such intentions could be a violation, potentially, of both state and federal laws, and at the very least is a likely violation of the rules and regulations of the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission.
According to Wisconsin State Statutes:
111.70(4)(cm)1.
1. `Notice of commencement of contract negotiations.’ For the purpose of advising the commission of the commencement of contract negotiations, whenever either party requests the other to reopen negotiations under a binding collective bargaining agreement, or the parties otherwise commence negotiations if no such agreement exists, the party requesting negotiations shall immediately notify the commission in writing. Upon failure of the requesting party to provide such notice, the other party may so notify the commission. The notice shall specify the expiration date of the existing collective bargaining agreement, if any, and shall set forth any additional information the commission may require on a form provided by the commission.And
111.70(4)(cm)2.
2. `Presentation of initial proposals; open meetings.’ The meetings between parties to a collective
bargaining agreement or proposed collective bargaining agreement under this subchapter which are held for the purpose of presenting initial bargaining proposals, along with supporting rationale, shall be open to the public. Each party shall submit its initial bargaining proposals to the other party in writing. Failure to comply with this subdivision is not cause to invalidate a collective bargaining agreement under this subchapter.
Lauren Cnare
Complaint, 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3
One
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently
facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the
Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank
National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice
it to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would
be, in fact, “anything of value.”
On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final
Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City
purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, by virtue of an Advisory
Opinion issued by the City of Madison Ethics Board on October 15, 2010, regarding Soliciting Funds
for a Conference, which stated, in part:The Ethics Board determines that solicitation of funds from entities which either are regulated by
the City or regularly do business with the City would violate sec. 3.35(5)(a) 2, because the Mayor would
be “solicit[ing]…from any person or entity…anything of value…” and that solicitation in this
case “could reasonably be expected to influence the incumbent’s vote, official actions, or
judgment…”The specifics of the Names and Dollar Amounts of the promised amounts, from the various ‘angel
donors,’ and an analysis of their current roles, if any, on the boards of any of the interested parties, or
their employment status with any of the interested parties, or their other influential relationships with
any of the interested parties will help establish who, if anyone, is similarly guilty of violation of the City
of Madison Ethics code, and also will establish the record of why this instance of the Council leadership
negotiating the terms and conditions of satisfaction of this forbearance agreement is an obviously more
egregious violation of section 3.35(5)(a)2 than is the proposed circumstance opined upon by the Ethics
Board in their 10/15/10 Advisory Opinion.I’m not even sure, given the existing Advisory Opinion, whether a further determination is necessary,
by the Ethics Board, but welcome the opportunity to see justice served, and Ethics prevail, a lot.
2.1
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it
to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in
fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final
Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City
purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:Use of Office or Position. No incumbent may use or attempt to use her or his position or office to obtain financial gain or anything of value or any advantage, privilege or treatment for the private benefit of herself or himself or her or his immediate family, or for an organization with which she or he is associated.
At the end of the game of Six Degrees of Separation, thus applied, it might be suggested that if the
Mayor’s assertion regarding the economic interest the City has in the outcome of this third party
transaction/$1 short-sale hybrid is not a lie, then Alders Clear and Cnare may have engaged in
negotiating the terms and conditions of something of value, either to outside interests, or of benefit for an
organization with which she or he is associated: the City of Madison.
2.2
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it
to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in
fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:
They shall not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so, and shall work in full cooperation with others unless prohibited from so doing by law or by officially recognized confidentiality of their work.At the end of the game of Six Degrees of Separation, thus applied, it might be suggested that if the Mayor’s assertion regarding the economic interest the City has in the outcome of this third party transaction/$1 short-sale hybrid is not a lie, then Alders Clear and Cnare may have engaged in negotiating the terms and conditions of something of value, either to outside interests, or of benefit for an organization with which she or he is associated: the City of Madison.
2.3
At some point over the past several months, Common Council President Pro Tem Lauren Cnare (Alder, 3rd District) and Common Council President Mark Clear (Alder, 19th district) invited themselves to participate in negotiations, and subsequently admitted to having engaged in those negotiations, on the City’s behalf, with representatives of Private interests.
The negotiations were intended to help facilitate endorsement of a plan that would be subsequently facilitate the satisfaction of a forbearance agreement between Overture Development Corporation, the Madison Cultural Arts District, 201 State Foundation, Inc., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., US Bank National Association, which is all too ridiculously complicated to do sufficient injustice to here. Suffice it
to say that, according to M.G.O. 3.35(2) (a), a ‘forbearance’ would constitute something that would be, in
fact, “anything of value.”On page 7 of the Forbearance Agreement, it is stipulated that:
“The Overture Parties have advised Lenders and Agents that the source of funds for the Final Payment shall be donations and gifts to 201 State or Overture Development Corporation.”
I believe that any and all steps taken, by Alders Cnare and Clear, in pursuit of facilitating the City purchase of Overture may be violations of the City of Madison Ethics Code, which states that:
They shall not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so, and shall work in full cooperation with others unless prohibited from so doing by law or by officially recognized confidentiality of their work.
I believe that engaging in negotiations with Private parties regarding the wages, benefits, and working conditions of unionized municipal employees, without the presence of the bargaining unit representatives of said Unions, and/or their legal counsel present at such negotiations, short of their refusal to attend said negotiations after proper and legal notification of such intentions could be a violation, potentially, of both state and federal laws, and at the very least is a likely violation of the rules and regulations of the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission.
According to Wisconsin State Statutes:
111.70(4)(cm)1.
1. `Notice of commencement of contract negotiations.’ For the purpose of advising the commission of the
commencement of contract negotiations, whenever either party requests the other to reopen negotiations under a binding collective bargaining agreement, or the parties otherwise commence negotiations if no such agreement exists, the party requesting negotiations shall immediately notify the commission in writing. Upon failure of the requesting party to provide such notice, the other party may so notify the commission. The notice shall specify the expiration date of the existing collective bargaining agreement, if any, and shall set forth any additional information the commission may require on a form provided by the commission.
And111.70(4)(cm)2.
2. `Presentation of initial proposals; open meetings.’ The meetings between parties to a collective
bargaining agreement or proposed collective bargaining agreement under this subchapter which are held
for the purpose of presenting initial bargaining proposals, along with supporting rationale, shall be open to the public. Each party shall submit its initial bargaining proposals to the other party in writing. Failure to comply with this subdivision is not cause to invalidate a collective bargaining agreement under this
subchapter.
Lisa Veldran
Complaint, 2 and 3
One
On Thursday, November 4th, 2010, Council Administrative Assistant Lisa Veldran chose not to click “Print” and then change the quantity “1” to “20,” in an attempt to help facilitate improved and productive conversation at that evening’s Common Council discussion meeting, which at the time was still three hours, four minutes, and 36 seconds away, presuming it started on time.
Rather than taking those steps, which would have likely amounted to no more than ten seconds work, she opted to use those 10 seconds or so, to write an e-mail back to a constituent saying, essentially:
“Too much work for me, Citizen Buckaroo!”
This is a very very funny (IMHO) paraphrasing of her actual response which was,Davin,
If you want all alders to receive a hard copy of your attachment please provide 20 copies at the meeting
tonight and I will make sure that it is distributed. Thank you.The actual response delivered was more tragically sad, than funny, in this reviewer’s opinion, as it is concrete evidence of government inaction and inefficiency hard not at work, which belies the reviewer’s well-informed opinion, to the contrary, that Government employees work more efficiently than do Private Sector employees, but that conclusion, it should be noted, is, in fact, backed up by research, so should not be dismissed as an uninformed opinion.
For the record, the paraphrasing that was suggested by the complainant was both funnier, and arguably more efficient. It might be concluded that sometimes funnier is better, and faster, in a particular context, such as this one. For the record, though, I do not presume a determination of funny or not funny is in the purview of the City of Madison Ethics Board.
We, as citizens, however, are entitled, I believe, to laugh or cry as we see fit.
Given the number of photocopied documents that Ms. Veldran facilitated printing and distribution of, to the Overture Ad Hoc Committee, when those documents were submitted by Steven Wolff, of AMS Planning and Research, or Tom Carto, of 201 State, or Andrew Taylor, who either directly or indirectly might have contractual relationships with both of the aforementioned parties, in light of her refusal to print and distribute twenty copies of a 2 page document, when the entirety of the work involved might have amounted to less time than her next visit to the toilet, or her next unwrapping of a new piece of gum, a citizen must wonder on what basis those contrary decisions might be based.
Given that Ms. Veldran works for the Common Council, and also the Mayor, one might conclude that her contrasting actions in these virtually identical situations, where the only difference in context is the publicly spoken support or opposition for an issue before the Common Council might be indicative of clouded judgment at best, but perhaps a self-serving mission to coddle her employer(s), and serve a pre-stated mission rather than helping facilitate the public interest.
This conclusion would only likely be invalidated if the Common Council, or the Mayoral staff play no part whatsoever in negotiating for the, or approving the negotiated terms and conditions of her employment. I have not yet done due diligence on whether the facts will bear out the assertion that both parties are, in fact, participants in her compensation determination, but based on my rudimentary knowledge of the ways and means of the City of Madison bureaucracy, I think that I know the answer.
Two
Seems to be the same as one.
Three
On Thursday, November 4th, 2010, Council Administrative Assistant Lisa Veldran chose not to click “Print” and then change the quantity “1” to “20,” in an attempt to help facilitate improved and productive conversation at that evening’s Common Council discussion meeting, which at the time was still three hours, four minutes, and 36 seconds away, presuming it started on time.
Rather than taking those steps, which would have likely amounted to no more than ten seconds work, she opted to use those 10 seconds or so, to write an e-mail back to a constituent saying, essentially:
“Too much work for me, Citizen Buckaroo!”
This is a very very funny (IMHO) paraphrasing of her actual response which was,
Davin,If you want all alders to receive a hard copy of your attachment please provide 20 copies at the meeting tonight and I will make sure that it is distributed. Thank you.
The actual response delivered was more tragically sad, than funny, in this reviewer’s opinion, as it is concrete evidence of government inaction and inefficiency hard not at work, which belies the reviewer’s well-informed opinion, to the contrary, that Government employees work more efficiently than do Private Sector employees, but that conclusion, it should be noted, is, in fact, backed up by research, so should not be dismissed as an uninformed opinion.
For the record, the paraphrasing that was suggested by the complainant was both funnier, and arguably more efficient. It might be concluded that sometimes funnier is better, and faster, in a particular context, such as this one. For the record, though, I do not presume a determination of funny or not funny is in the purview of the City of Madison Ethics Board. We, as citizens, however, are entitled, I believe, to laugh or cry as we see fit.
Given the definition of her job, “Administrative Assistant,” and given the language of the Class Specification for that position, which includes the following:
…Work is characterized by responsibility for a wide variety of administrative services (such as the development and implementation of budgetary documentation and fiscal controls, personnel, purchasing, payroll, and the supervision of office clerical activities); and/or direct responsibility for a comprehensive administrative program requiring the development and integration of diverse and complex operational data inherent to unit operations… This work is performed with a high degree of independence and discretion… Employees may supervise subordinate administrative and clerical staff.
Examples of Duties and Responsibilities:
Develop and implement major divisional and/or departmental administrative programs and functions. Develop budgetary information (narrative, financial, and statistical reports and controls). Set up and maintain budgetary account status records. Recommend fund transfers, represent the department/division head in routine budgetary matters in relationship with the Comptroller’s Office.Provide administrative support to various committees/commissions. Arrange committee meetings and prepare and distribute notices, minutes, and related materials.
