Everyone who has been paying attention knows that Dr. Gregory Gelembuik has greatly influenced the Ad Hoc Police Policy and Procedure Committee. The council spent much of the last two meetings discussing his appointment to this committee so the committee can have quorum and finish their work. He’s been to all the meetings, he’ll help with quorum and he’s highly effective, principled and helpful. And therein lies the problem – at least for some!
The last two council meetings were spent debating if they should have 12 or 13 people on the committee and then if Greg should be appointed. They also spent time discussing it at CCEC earlier in get day. Both council meetings it passed with 13 votes.
I don’t understand the need to drag this person through the mud when he has been so integral to the work of the committee. And I’m shocked that City Attorney May – who is up for contract renewal – would speak this way about a mayoral appointment. Sigh . . . I’ll let Greg explain in his usual thorough way! I believe he deserves an apology.
– – –
Dear Alders and Mayor,
I am writing to correct a false representation of my conduct during a 2017 PSRC meeting, as related by City Attorney Michael May to the Common Council on Tuesday 5/21/2019. Given its potential impact on my reputation, especially among alders who do not know me, I felt it needed to be rectified. City Attorney May attributed statements to me that I did not make. Alder Skidmore then commented that he could corroborate May’s account and added further false information. Luckily, we have a recording of the meeting to dispel the misinformation provided you.
The meeting referenced was a PSRC meeting in 2017. The primary agenda item for the meeting was discussion and decision on the report of the President’s Work Group. At issue in the PSRC meeting was the validity of a legal memo by a Madison Assistant City Attorney. Prior to the meeting, I had sent the PSRC a lengthy e-mail, containing seven primary pieces of information (including/attaching/linking legal analyses by three different attorneys, a case law discussion, information about practices in different municipalities, etc.). Prior to that, I had sent questions to various attorneys, asking for their analysis of the Assistant City Attorney memo. One response I received was from William Turner (an attorney with particular expertise on issues of governmental structure), and that was one of the legal analyses I included with my e-mail. As the concluding sentence in one paragraph, Turner’s legal analysis (which I link here) includes the words “If they can’t point to specific statutory language prohibiting what you’re trying to do, they’re full of shit.”
I never uttered this word in the entire meeting. During my public comment, I never even mentioned Turner’s analysis (instead I spoke about other points and analyses). Subsequently in the meeting, Alder Skidmore decided to grill me, to try to discredit the information I provided. He immediately focused on Turner’s memo. In grilling me, Alder Skidmore uttered the word “shit” and I never did. He asked me if I agreed with Turner’s analysis and, sparring back, I replied yes. In asking that question, Alder Skidmore’s tactic was clear – seeking to create a situation where I’d either have to repudiate a valid legal analysis because it contained an expletive or open myself to being portrayed as uncivil. He asked me why I thought the committee should consider the analysis of an attorney who acts unprofessionally. During much of this grilling, the whole room, including other alders present, were laughing, with multiple people making side comments about “pearl clutching”.
City Attorney Michael May’s statement to you about the incident did not accurately reflect what occurred. Specifically, May stated “Mr Gelembiuk referred to some work of my staff as being a piece of four letter word for excrement. And I challenged him on it. I said did you really mean to say that about this work and use that word and he sort of doubled down and said yes I meant it because I thought it was true. And at that point I sort of lost it. I don’t think that’s the way we want to have civil discourse in this city.”
This portrayal creates a gross misimpression of my actions. I never uttered an expletive and never originated a statement of my own using an expletive, and as a transcript of May’s comments shows, he never asked me “did you really mean to say that about this work and use that word” and I never said in response “yes I meant it because I thought it was true.”
Meanwhile, Alder Skidmore told the Council: “I was present at the meeting and I did hear the discourse and I must disagree with the Mayor. Dr G did use those exact words and Marci Paulsen was nothing less than professional and respectful and there was no two way. She listened and he ranted. So I want to make that clear.”
Alder Skidmore’s account is also false. In reality, ACA Marci Paulsen was not present at the meeting and as the recording establishes, I never ever “ranted” in the least.
Many who were present at the PSRC meeting, including other alders, perceived May’s subsequent angry behavior at the meeting as unprofessional. They perceived May as inappropriately personally attacking me. Meanwhile, May and Alder Skidmore held that it was uncivil for me to have provided the PSRC with Turner’s legal analysis containing the word in question. In looking at such situations, there will always be an element of Rashomon, with perceptions colored by political views and allegiances.
In reality, I am not a rude, ranting individual who swears like a sailor (as many throughout Madison must now believe, given the statements by Mr. May and Alder Skidmore). A more accurate representation of my general comportment during committee meetings is provided by League of Women Voters representative Kathleen Fullin, who has regularly attended Ad Hoc Committee meetings (and attended the PSRC meeting in question). I have no affiliation with Kathleen Fullin and we are not personal friends. She wrote me last week “I’m sorry about this. It must be personally stressful. I hope you take some comfort in knowing that the group of people who have seen you interact with the committee know that you are low-key in your approach, but extremely diligent in bringing facts to the committee’s attention. And they all know that you are extremely honest and straightforward.”
Since I am writing you, I thought I would take this opportunity to also convey some information about the Community Response Team, the organization with which I am affiliated. The Community Response Team is a local organization, composed of Madison residents and reform-minded former/current MPD officers, devoted to police reform and a public health approach to public safety. Cofounders included MPD Captain Cheri Maples and MPD Officer Jean Papalia (Jean was a former Neighborhood Officer, played a large role in development of MPD’s mental health training, and served on the McFarland PFC).Michael Scott, another former MPD officer who is currently the director of the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, has also participated in Community Response Team member meetings, as has former MPD Chief David Couper. Current MPD officers have also been members and serve as advisors for the Community Response Team, but I will not name them here, since publicly acknowledging them could open them to retaliation within MPD.
Sincerely,
Dr. Gregory Gelembiuk
