I was an alder for 8 years. It seemed like I was always running into a “no” – a brick wall. There wasn’t support to help you do what you wanted to do, just no. no. and no. This Alder Skidmore kerfluffle is just the latest example of the internal crap of being an alder.Ugh, what a mess. I’ll try to catch you up on the the weeks events.
WHA’ HAPPEN?
Sorry, just watched this movie again . . .
It rhymes with blunt . . .
SKIDMORE DENIES HE SAID IT
The Cap Times reports that Skidmore is denying it was him.
“I don’t say things like that. I don’t use vulgarity in meetings, and I don’t use it outside of meetings,” Skidmore said. “It’s not acceptable.”
If not Skiddy, then who? How could it not be him?
MAYOR AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT DENOUNCE SKIDMORE AND THE COUNCIL DECORUM
Here’s their statement:
Over the past few months, the culture and civility of Common Council meetings has drastically deteriorated, culminating in what appears to be the use of gender based profanity addressed at a member of the public at the September 1st Council meeting.
No words of gender-based violence should ever be uttered by anyone, period. No profanity should be used towards members of the body and no such language, verbally or otherwise, should be used against anyone in our community.
The public has a right and expectation to be treated and listened to with respect when attending a public meeting. City officials and staff must uphold that standard at all times.
With Common Council meetings being conducted virtually we want to remind all Council members to refrain from using profanity during our Council and Committee meetings. This behavior is totally unacceptable.
Elected officials are charged with great responsibilities that impact the lives of people every day, residents, employees and business owners and as such we should be held to high standards and set an example for the community.
Alders using profanity or a derogatory statement during public meetings – whether virtually or in person — or even on social media, is indisputably uncalled for and should not be a part of our proceedings as we conduct the business of the City. The City’s residents deserves better from us.
We encourage alders to come up with systems for us to hold each other accountable outside of elections and look forward to the work of the President’s Work Group on Administrative Procedures to come up with processes moving forward.
COUNCIL TRIES TO BE EFFECTIVE
They wouldn’t let their statement go out on letterhead, or be put on the website and got the city attorney to raise fear about open meetings laws. 13 alders did get their message out to the press anyways. I couldn’t find their statement anywhere and council staff wouldn’t send it to me. I had to wait for Alder Tag Evers to send it. 14 alders have now signed on. Here’s the letter – on letterhead! 9.3.2020 Open Letter
Open Letter to the Public
Response to Mayor and Council President Statement Regarding Behavior at September 1 Common Council Meeting
We are writing to express our concern regarding the September 2, 2020 statement issued by Mayor Rhodes-Conway and Common Council President Carter regarding behavior at the
September 1, 2020 Common Council meeting.
First, we challenge the framing of the issues. We agree with the Mayor and President’s strong words condemning the use of gender-based profanity directed at a member of our community. We agree there is no place for such an utterance in our meetings and that city residents should never be treated with disdain and disrespect.
And, to that point, on behalf of the Madison Common Council, we, the undersigned Alders,
apologize to Ms. Kilfoy-Flores, the community, and to all those harmed by what occurred at our last meeting.
But we do not agree with the assertion that “the culture and civility of Common Council
meetings have drastically deteriorated,” nor that this supposed deterioration “culminated” in the inexcusable use of a misogynist slur against a member of our community. Such an assertion deflects attention and accountability from the actual harm that was caused.
It is important that we agree on who is to blame for the outburst. There is little question as to the source and we ask that the person who uttered this word comes forward of their own accord. If that individual fails to step forward, we request a thorough investigation, including a forensic analysis of the recording. In the context of restorative justice, acknowledging the truth is the prerequisite for reconciliation, both among ourselves and with the broader community.
Regarding the culture and civility of Common Council meetings, we have indeed had tense
moments over the past year dealing with controversial topics ranging from the vehicle
registration fee, to F-35s, to, most recently, police oversight. That is nothing out of the ordinary for political discourse in a public forum. At times, discussions get heated, feelings get hurt and egos get bruised. Despite all this, we generally find a way to work together and continue the task of representing the people of Madison and moving our City forward.
More to the point, we disagree that the “culture and civility” at our meetings have deteriorated in recent months. What has changed in recent months has been an increased outpouring of public comment and debate about the value of Black lives and the accountability of public agencies and elected officials. Our meetings have provided a much-needed forum for residents to express their grievances about city policies and the votes and statements made by elected officials. Using this incident to direct blame towards Council culture rather than directing the focus on the inexcusable behavior of one individual, mischaracterizes the work of the Madison Common Council and risks eroding the public’s faith and confidence in our work.
We strongly condemn this very regrettable incident. We further call upon the Mayor and Council President to take additional steps to ensure such behavior is not repeated and that the harm done to our community is addressed.
Sincerely,
Patrick Heck, District 2
Lindsay Lemmer, District 3
Mike Verveer, District 4
Shiva Bidar, District 5
Marsha Rummel, District 6
Donna Moreland, District 7
Max Prestigiacomo, District 8
Arvina Martin, District 11
Syed Abbas, District 12, Council Vice-President
Tag Evers, District 13
Grant Foster, District 15
Rebecca Kemble, District 18
Keith Furman, District 19
Christian Albouras, District 20
COUNCIL GETS THEIR HANDS SLAPPED/POOR (NOT) LAWYERING
Um, before an attorney advises their client and givers them legal advice, shouldn’t they first make sure they actually did the legal work needed to give said advice? I was really hoping we wouldn’t have another “shoot from the hip” city attorney. And one that gives non-legal opinions as if they should be policy makers . . . see bolded statements below.
| From: “Haas, Michael R” <MHaas@cityofmadison.com> Date: September 3, 2020 at 9:55:12 PM CDT To: All Alders <allalders@cityofmadison.com> Subject: Joint statementsNOTE: THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A ONE-WAY ELECTRONIC MEMORANDUM. This is an electronic memo, and is not to intended to create a discussion among Council members of any of the matters in the memo. Do not reply to all from this email.Dear Alders,Because of the flurry of communications I had with several Alders today regarding the video from this week’s Council meeting and the request for some immediate decisions today, I thought I would briefly outline some of my initial thoughts and concerns, and follow up with a more detailed analysis. I was asked by Council staff whether there were any legal concerns with issuing, on Council letterhead, a public letter or press release from 11 alders regarding the remark that was captured on the Zoom meeting video, and which expressed criticism of two Alders. After some consideration, I have identified two potential concerns: 1. Open Meetings Law: As I discussed with several Alders this afternoon, the Open Meetings Law prohibits conducting governmental business except in a meeting that is noticed and open to the public, with some exceptions for closed session. “Conducting governmental business” is an expansive concept that is not limited to formal or final decision-making. It includes preliminary decisions, discussions and information-gathering related to a topic under the body’s jurisdiction. The issues covered in the joint statement could come before the Council in a couple of different ways. The Council could decide to pass a resolution expressing the body’s sentiments about what occurred, the Council could consider and vote on conducting an investigation, or a resident taxpayer could file a sworn complaint requesting that the Council hold a hearing and remove an Alder, which would require a ¾ vote of the Council. My concern is that creating the joint statement could constitute a preliminary decision or discussion on a topic under the Council’s jurisdiction. There is certainly nothing prohibiting individual alders from speaking out or issuing individual statements on any topic. The desire to issue a joint statement appears to be aimed at lending greater weight to the statement as a communication from a majority of the body. That would seem to support the notion that the topic is considered governmental business. I have been told that Attorney May provided instructions on the creation and issuance of joint statements from Alders, and I am certainly interested in reviewing any guidance our office previously issued on this topic. In the meantime, however, it is the responsibility of our office to alert elected officials and City staff of potential legal issues, especially considering that the penalties for violating the Open Meetings Law includes forfeitures for which Alders could be personally liable. I would expect Alders would be dissatisfied with our counsel if an Open Meetings complaint was filed and prosecuted regarding a matter we were aware of and we had not flagged issues of concern. I have been intending to revisit and address the practice of joint statements being issued such as the recent communications regarding the public health orders. I am requesting, therefore, that Alders refrain from issuing joint letters signed by a negative quorum of Council members or members of a relevant committee until we have an opportunity to review previous guidance and determine whether it needs to be reiterated or revised. 2. Use of Council letterhead and Council staff: I also raised with Council staff a concern about use of the Common Council letterhead and their time for the joint statement because of the precedent it would set, the position it puts Council staff in, and the lack of clear rules for use of the letterhead giving the impression that a document was issued by the Council as a body rather than by individual Alders. I have been with the City less than four months and this is the third incident in which I have heard complaints about inappropriate statements made by Alders on or off the Council floor. I am not judging or equating any of those statements but my point is that any Alder can be a target of a critical communication from another Alder who could ask the Council staff to issue a public statement on Council letterhead. Is Council staff to honor such requests if they come from one Alder, two Alders, or more? (See Open Meetings concern above.) Council staff reports to the Council President and CCEC but works on behalf of all Alders. What is their obligation to participate in issuing critical statements about Alders who are likely to disagree with the statements and the use of Council letterhead and staff time to issue them, and seek opportunities to issue their own statements about other Alders on Council letterhead? Are Council staff responsible for determining whether statements in joint communications are legally defamatory? Is facilitating disagreements among Alders an appropriate and best use of Council staff’s time? To my knowledge there has not been any policies or guidelines established regarding the use of Council letterhead (as opposed to individual Alder letterhead) or the use of Council staff time for this activity. Given this lack of guidance or, frankly, protection for staff, It struck me as unfair to place Council staff in the position of making an immediate decision about issuing the type of joint statement they were asked to issue this afternoon. In my judgment the wiser course was to hold off until the issues could be fully considered rather than creating issues that would be more difficult to undo or unravel if the letter was immediately issued. Unless I am provided with compelling reasons why the general Council letterhead and Council staff time should be used in this way without clear direction from the full Council, my intent is to continue with this advice to Council staff. I plan to follow up regarding the Open Meetings Law issues but I wanted to get this out to you as soon as I could. In the meantime, please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this communication. Mike
|
CONCLUSION?!?
- What a mess.
- Skidmore needs to admit it was him.
- The alders need to be able to use their own letterhead.
- The alders need to direct their own staff, not the city attorney.
- The alders need to be able to issue their own press releases using city resources
- If you want alders to know what you think you can email them at allalders@cityofmadison.com
