I dunno. The policies don’t say. And this is the response we got.
I blogged about the meeting (you can watch for yourself), the ethics violation and then the actual complaint if you need to catch up!
RESPONSE
Dear Mr. Heidt:
Thank you for your communication. As set forth in BOE Policy 1540, the Board monitors its members’ conduct and adherence to District policy. The Board will exercise this authority in assessing and addressing your allegations.
Thank you,
WHAT DOES IT MEAN?
I’m guessing that it means we are going to just be ignored. Or that its going in the circular file.
ANDY HEIDT’S RESPONSE
Dear Mr. Bell,
Thank you for acknowledging our complaint. It never would have been filed, but we were concerned when we learned the board president continued to work for the city of Madison. We assumed as a political appointee her position ended when the new mayor was sworn in. Her vote is clearly in violation of WI Statute 19.46(1)(a)and (b) as employment with an entity that is subject to a contract should automatically trigger recusal. Clearly primary employment constitutes a substantial financial interest.
The president has substantial conflicts that necessitate recusal on this or any other city matter while she maintains employment with Madison.
As a secondary matter, is it common practice that chairs make motions? This violates Roberts Rules of Order unless the chair steps down or vacates and allows someone else to assume the position so a motion may be made.
Thank you for addressing this matter in a professional and ethical fashion.
Sincerely,
Andy Heidt
AND NOW?
We wait.
