Good morning, Whitewater

There are no public meetings scheduled for the city today.

The National Weather Service predicts that today will be sunny with a high of 42 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac continues a Thanksgiving series predicting continued “fair and cold” weather. Similar predictions.

Yesterday’s better prediction: About even. It was clear last evening, a beautiful, dark sky.

In Wisconsin history today, as the Wisconsin Historical Society reports it, a sensible decision if ever there were one — Legislature Assembled in Madison for the First Time —

1838 –
On this date, after moving from the temporary capital in Burlington, Iowa, the Wisconsin Territorial Legislature assembled in Madison for the first time. Two years earlier, when the territorial legislature had met for the first time in Belmont, many cities were mentioned as possibilities for the permanent capital — Cassville, Fond du Lac, Milwaukee, Platteville, Mineral Point, Racine, Belmont, Koshkonong, Wisconsinapolis, Peru, and Wisconsin City. Madison won the vote, and funds were authorized to erect a suitable building in which lawmakers would conduct the people’s business. Progress went so slowly, however, that some lawmakers wanted to relocate the seat of government to Milwaukee, where they also thought they would find better accomodations than in the wilds of Dane Co. When the legislature finally met in Madison in November 1838 there was only an outside shell to the new Capitol. The interior was not completed until 1845, more than six years after it was supposed to be finished. On November 26, 1838, Governor Henry Dodge delivered his first speech in the new seat of government.

Now, not everything in Madison is perfect. We may be grateful tomorrow, though, on Thanksgiving, that we are not governed from Burlington, Cassville, or Koshkonong.

Good morning, Whitewater

There are no public meetings scheduled for the city again today.

The National Weather Service predicts that today will be mostly sunny with a high of 35 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac continues a Thanksgiving series predicting continued “fair and cold” weather.

Yesterday’s better prediction: NWS, easily — we had snow.

In our schools today, at Washington School, there is a third grade field trip to the Irvin Young Auditorium on campus, to see the Magic Tree House: The Musical. Now I never had a tree house, but I am confident that, in certain ways, the students seeing the show will find that every tree house has a bit of magic in it. Enjoy.

Here are scenes from the world premiere of the musical, based on the series from Mary Pope Osborne —

I received a message recently from the Phantom Stranger, whose storied career hardly need be recounted on these pages. 

He has been in Whitewater for a while, and dropped me a line.  It’s my pleasure to hear from him. 

Here’s what he had to say, with my remarks thereafter in blue. 

Nice to see Walgreen’s open: their prices are very competitive with the local WalMart. I’m sure the students will soon discover the cost in savings, compared to Sentry, “the only game in town.” Any update on the East side grocery? We no longer grocery shop in Whitewater: Sentry is so high and marked up. We grocery shop weekly in Fort, or Delavan, or Jefferson, where prices are realistic. Same for gas—cheaper a few miles out of town.

He went on to note that he felt higher prices were like the actions of Robber Barons.

Adams replies:
 
The Phantom Stranger’s not alone in these views – many in the city share them.  What’s different about Whitewater is the conviction that it’s wrong – almost a betrayal – to hold views that might be critical of a local business.  There is very much a my-city-right-or-wrong view that grips Whitewater.
 
As you can guess, I do not share it.  The world is filled with cities, and businesses in them; favoring one local enterprise blindly is no more sensible than anyone else abroad slavishly devoted to a place in which they were born.
 
It’s not a city as place, but the quality of its institutions, how well-ordered it is, that matters.   
 
That’s why someone can hope for new and different businesses to provide competition, to benefit consumers, without betraying one’s city.  Quite the contrary – competition improves life here, sometimes considerably.   
 
That’s also the difference between a pro-business and a market outlook – I favor free exchange, without seeking to defend one or another business.  I don’t wish any businesses ill (although I have mentioned that I consider Cousins subs unpalatable). 

Good morning, Whitewater

There are no public meetings scheduled for the city today. Your weekend was filled with private activity, that you managed as well as you could. Why interrupt that private time with a municipal schedule? Two private days might extend into three, a week, yet more… I am in an optimistic way this morning.

The National Weather Service predicts that today offers snow and a high of 39 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac begins a Thanksgiving series predicting continued “fair and cold” weather.

It’s snowing now, as I write, showing what happens to a planner looking a year ahead, and attempting to predict something so complicated as the weather.

Last week’s better prediction: About even, only the second or third week like that since I have been tracking.

In our schools today, there is a School Board meeting at 7 p.m. The agenda is available online.

In Wisconsin history on this date, in 1959, I-90 opened to traffic from Janesville to Beloit, as the Wisconsin Historical Society observes —

On this date Interstate 90 opened to traffic between Janesville and Beloit. Work was temporarily halted north of Janesville as the exact route was not yet determined and property not yet acquired.

Interstate 90 is thousands of miles long, stretching from one side of America to the other.

Good morning – I received the following press release announcing promising opportunities for our Aquatic Center – with the local board of directors reassuming control on January 1st, 2009. Whitewater has every reason to be proud of the Center, and support its ongoing role in our community.

Here is the full release:

November 21, 2008

WAC board of directors and Mercy Health System

Good morning, Whitewater

There are no public meetings scheduled for the City of Whitewater at week’s end.

The National Weather Service predicts that today will be sunny with a high of 28 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac predicts “rain and west snow.”

Yesterday’s better prediction: NWS. No rain…

In our schools today, this evening, at the high school the fall production of Lucky Stiff continues.

In Wisconsin history on this date, according to the Wisconsin Historical Society, in 1968, it was “Black Thursday at UW-Oshkosh”:

On this date, 96 African-American students were arrested for occupying the university president’s office to protest the University administration’s refusal to commit to adding more black teachers, classes in African-American history, black speakers on campus, and a black cultural center. Although the students were jailed and suspended from the University, within a year many of their ideas were implemented, including adding black literature and history classes and opening an Interracial Cultural Center.

An exhibit about the Black Thursday protests is available online at the UW Oshkosh website.

Good morning, Whitewater

There are no public meetings scheduled for the City of Whitewater today.

The National Weather Service predicts that today will bring flurries with a high of 31 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac predicts “rain and west snow.”

Yesterday’s better prediction: Again, the same between the NWS and FA, but cloudier than the FA predicted.

In our schools today, this evening, at the high school there will be the fall production of Lucky Stiff. Enjoy.

In American history on this date, from 1820, comes a story about the revenge of one righteously angry whale. The story, from recounts, how

the whaling ship Essex is rammed and sunk by a sperm whale 2,000 miles off the west coast of South America. The ordeal of the crew inspires Herman Melville’s classic, Moby Dick. The Essex was an aging vessel from Nantucket, which at the time possessed the largest whaling fleet in the world. The three-masted ship was 87 feet long and weighed 238 tons. She was captained by George Pollard Jr., at 28 already an experienced whaler.

Much more effective than Greenpeace — If one wants to hunt whales, one should be prepared for those times when whales hunt back.

Good morning, Whitewater

There is a Tree Commission meeting, at 4:00 p.m. No other public meetings are listed on the City of Whitewater’s website today.

The National Weather Service predicts that today will bring gradual clearing with a high of 43 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac predicts that today will be “fair and cold.”

Yesterday’s better prediction: About the same between the NWS and FA.

In American history on this date, from 1863, comes the anniversary of the Gettysburg Address. Brief and beautiful, the address appears below.

Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final resting-place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who struggled here have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living rather to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.

Good morning, Whitewater

There is a Common Council meeting, at 6:30 p.m. The agenda is available online at the City of Whitewater’s website.

The National Weather Service predicts that today brings cloudy skies and a high of 34 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac predicts that today will be “fair and cold.”

Yesterday’s better prediction: About even, with a few flurries favoring the NWS prediction only negligibly.

In our schools today, there is a Singing in Wisconsin event in Waukesha.

In Wisconsin history on this date, from 1930, comes a tale from Prohibition, as the Wisconsin Historical Society reports it —

On this date federal agents and county deputies raided Otto Matschke’s home, north of Beloit, and seized an illegal still and 300 gallons of contraband moonshine.

Here’s an example — although not specific to Otto’s ingenuity — of a moonshine still from the era –

Looking at it, how could one not cringe in abject fear? Does one not see the threat a still like this represented, to the American way of life? As the Depression gripped a continent, with millions at risk of hunger, who would not direct the resources of the federal government toward an anti-moonshine campaign?

Let us commit ourselves, in these present, difficult economic times, to do all we can to prevent a return of anything once might consider so threatening, troubling, and raucous.

Good morning, Whitewater

I will begin with a final reminder for the Downtown Whitewater, Inc. election from among candidates to its Board of Directors. Ballots are due by this morning at 10 AM.

Here are the details:

The 2008 election is now open for four seats on our Downtown Whitewater Board of Directors. Attached please find the 2008 ballot and candidate bios. [Ballot and bios are attached online. One can right click and download these links.]

You may vote immediately and marked ballots will be accepted until Monday, November 17, at 10 AM. The ballot can be cast in one of two ways:

1. Return your marked ballot to the Downtown Whitewater office downstairs at the Main Street Shoppes either by dropping it off (there will be a ballot box to leave it in if the office is locked) or by mailing it to: Box 688, Whitewater, 53190.

2. Scan your marked ballot and email it to zaballos@charter.net.

Remember, you must be a Downtown Whitewater stakeholder to vote. To qualify you must have done ONE of the following:

- been a founding member of the DRG
- donated to Downtown Whitewater
- volunteered for DW within the past year (includes serving on a committee)
- agreed to donate or volunteer in the next year (by signing the form on the ballot)

Please read the attached ballot carefully; ballots that are late or with incomplete information will not be counted. We hope the attached bios provide you with the information you need to make your choice. If you have any other questions, please contact DWI Executive Director Tami Brodnicki at 262-473-2200 or director@downtownwhitewater.com.

There are two municipal public meetings scheduled in City of Whitewater today: a 3:30 p.m. meeting of the CDA Board of Directors, and a 6:00 p.m. meeting of the Planning Commission.

The National Weather Service predicts that today offers a likelihood of flurries, with a high of 35 degrees. The Farmers’ Almanac predicts that today will be “fair and cold.”

Last week’s better prediction: NWS.

In our schools today, at 6:30 p.m., there is a banquet for the Girls Swimming team, at the high school.

I don’t smoke, although reading about Democrats’ plans to try (again) for a statewide smoking ban makes me think about lighting up in protest. Having now secured the majority in both chambers of the legislature, in a state suffering a projected budget deficit, and a declining economy, someone must think that keeping tavern patrons from smoking is a top priority.

Why keep people from smoking?

Perhaps it’s for smokers’ own good. Adults can read the label that says the Surgeon General warns of plagues and pestilence for those who smoke. If they break out in boils, it’s not as though they weren’t warned. I am fully in favor of adults making a free choice like this.

Perhaps children will follow adult smokers’ examples, and light up themselves. I support smoking restrictions for minors, but if you’re really worried about kids smoking, then talk to your kids about smoking. I am from an era when students often did smoke in schools, in lounges designated for that purpose. It was only a minority of students who carried on this way. They were unpopular, and often a bit grimy, actually.

(Sorry, today’s youth of America – you can’t even lawfully jaywalk now. When you’re fifty, and everyone who imposed these inane restrictions is long gone, you’ll be able to use your disposable income to skydive while wearing tie dye, and jaywalk with impunity. Patience!)

Perhaps smokers seem like a burden on society, contracting all sorts of diseases they might otherwise avoid.

Nothing is more false! Smokers save society money, contracting diseases that cause them to die far sooner than healthy people. In the Netherlands, a study, involving the obese and smokers are subjects, concluded that healthy people – who live longer than smokers — cost society more than pathetic nicotine fiends foraging between sofa cushions for misplaced cigarette butts. See, Lifetime Medical Costs of Obesity: Prevention No Cure for Increasing Health Expenditure.

With a simulation model, lifetime health-care costs were estimated for a cohort of obese people aged 20 y at baseline. To assess the impact of obesity, comparisons were made with similar cohorts of smokers and “healthy-living” persons (defined as nonsmokers with a body mass index between 18.5 and 25). Except for relative risk values, all input parameters of the simulation model were based on data from The Netherlands. In sensitivity analyses the effects of epidemiologic parameters and cost definitions were assessed. Until age 56 y, annual health expenditure was highest for obese people. At older ages, smokers incurred higher costs. Because of differences in life expectancy, however, lifetime health expenditure was highest among healthy-living people and lowest for smokers. Obese individuals held an intermediate position. Alternative values of epidemiologic parameters and cost definitions did not alter these conclusions.

Emphasis added.

(The morbidly overweight also offer cost-savings over healthy people. Eat up, Wisconsin!)

What about second-hand smoke? It’s wildly exaggerated as a healthy risk.

The science in favor of a ban is speculative; proponents of a ban likely act from false certainty or disguised aesthetic prejudices.

Many may not like smoking, or think it’s revolting. Very well – stay out of bars that allow smoking. You’re free to drink in taverns that voluntarily choose to prohibit smoking, or the dark, dank basements of your own liberty-despising homes.

By the way, if you really think that smoking is – in all times and places – ugly, then how do you explain this?

There’s simply no way that Big Tobacco can mar Miss Madsen’s aesthetic qualities. It’s just impossible. (Somewhere, someone is squealing that this photo is ‘inappropriate.’ Whatever. I care nothing for that opinion, and – I have something better on my side.)

Democrats, liberals, progressives – can’t you find focus on more important regulations? Republicans went down the big-government path from the right, and look where that got them. There’s a part of me that welcomes this focus, and a focus on possible mandatory civilian community service, because few goals are more impractical and irritating simultaneously.

Go slow, but feel free to keep talking about it.

Well, we in Whitewater, Wisconsin are not given to introspection. We lead by cheerleading. That’s not my view; I am happy in dissent from, and against, cheerleading. I would be ashamed to be so callow.

The federal constitutional lawsuit against former investigator Meyer and the Whitewater Police Department is now settled. The world did not stop when the lawsuit in this matter ended. What can be learned from that lawsuit, its allegations, and the responses from city and press to it?

(1) Why settle?

Larry Meyer’s career has been bad for the city, and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can’t put Larry back together again. For every empty but strident defense from Chief Jim Coan, to all the support in the world from his friends in Elkhorn, one truth remains: Meyer is offering settlement on a federal lawsuit about a citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights. That’s no simple mistake — he’s settling on a constitutional claim. He will contend that he’s admitted no wrong-doing, but that’s whistling past the graveyard. Meyer would not likely have settled — not Meyer, nor any other excuse-making, self-justifying member of the Whitewater Police Department — if he’d been more confident of his conduct.

(2) Why pay more than the reputed original settlement proposal?

The extra, unusual effort to enforce the reputed original settlement only cost more. Lost time, lost money, on a long-shot effort. There’s no point in pouncing on what one cannot hold.

(3) Why no trial?

Because it saves the insurance company from the cost of a trial? Well, only in part — the cost from the risk of losing at trial. No one should ever answer that avoiding the cost of a trial is why a municipality acted. It only seems clever until one considers what it means – the savings is not the cost of lawyers’ time, it’s the avoidance of a jury’s judgment against the city.

(4) Why seek confidentiality in the settlement?

I have argued against confidentiality. (See, Against Confidentiality in Municipal Litigation and Cat Has Your Tongue?)

First, this federal lawsuit against Larry Meyer involves a federal constitutional claim against public officials, and a municipality, in the course of public duties. The entire matter involves a claim about the legality and propriety of public action. This is the very definition of a matter of public interest. It should not be hushed up through a confidentiality agreement.

Second, citizens should know and understand how paid municipal employees, in the discharge of their official duties, actually conduct themselves. This allows citizens to (1) know the truth of employee’s actual conduct, (2) advocate for reforms when needed, and (3) be aware of the risks of misconduct where it has occurred, (4) or be confident in cases where it has not occurred.

Third, those public employees who claim that their conduct is upstanding should be willing to allow an open judicial process, available to the review of fellow citizens, journalists, and lawyers.

Fourth, defendants can, and do, settle cases — without an admission of wrongdoing — and also without confidentiality agreements. A public employee’s insurance carrier, or a municipality’s insurance carrier, need not admit the employee’s wrongdoing to settle. That insurance carrier should not hide the mere facts of a public matter from the very public that authorizes, pays, and relies on the public employee’s conduct.

Fifth, settlements in public maters, involving public officials, paid with public money that are hidden through confidentiality agreements constitute attempts by those officials to afford themselves the condition of private parties while simultaneously exercising public duties. It’s unfair to have both: a man may choose a private vocation, but he should not assume and benefit from a public one, only to ask that his public actions be hidden through a means more suitable in private endeavors.

Sixth, even in private matters, confidentiality agreements may be used, all too often, to allow corporations to hide the truth of their dangerous products from consumers, leaving consumers unable to evaluate the risk and rewards of purchasing goods at a give price. Markets work best when consumers receive information about the true functioning of a product.

Seventh, a confidentiality agreement in this matter would be contrary Wisconsin’s public policy commitment to open records. My point is not that it cannot be done, but that it should not be done.

Here is the clear test, the question of principle: Why should this public lawsuit, involving public officials, involved in the public exercise of their duties, be made confidential? ….

The same men who loudly boast of every accomplishment when it serves them want to hide this matter now.

(5) Why imagine that confidentiality could trump a public records request under Wisconsin law? Why even bother?

Consider my seventh point, made nearly a year ago: “Seventh, a confidentiality agreement in this matter would be contrary Wisconsin’s public policy commitment to open records.” Confidential here is a fool’s provision.

(6) Only one settlement, or more?

You tell me.

(7) Why insist on the false notion that taxpayers of the city paid nothing in settlement?

The City Manager trotted out the same contention in the fall.

I responded months ago that a it was false to contend that a

settlement that may amount to tens of thousands will cost the city nothing. He [City Fiance Director] justified his statement by telling a local paper that our city is insured, and that the policy has a zero deductible…I know that there cannot be a resolution to the case without cost to the city, as Larry Meyer has cost us too much already.

Literally, too, one would have to believe that services were rendered to the city at no cost of any kind, either through the carrier by premiums, or through the cost of time and effort spent within the city on this defense. One would have to believe that it was free of cost.

To say so is an insult, but a silly one.

(8) Why take a police investigator under a federal lawsuit, and place him on Star Packaging investigation?

(9) Why honor Meyer with profuse praise in 2007, in May, while a lawsuit was still pending?

(10) Did Meyer ever disclose that he had a personal, close relationship amounting to a conflict with someone close to the plaintiff during Meyer’s investigation of the lawsuit plaintiff?

See, “Expert Witness: Investigator Led Crusade Against Businessman.”

“Meyer “obviously had more than an objective, professional law enforcement interest in the activities of Steve Cvicker,” wrote Dennis Waller, a police expert hired by Cvicker.

In his opinion, Waller said Meyer failed to objectively investigate Cvicker’s now ex-wife because he allegedly had a personal interest in her and mounted “what appeared to be a personal crusade against Mr. Cvicker.

“This crusade, which can be likened to a personal vendetta, negatively impacted Mr. Cvicker’s marriage, business and personal freedom,” Waller wrote in a May 14 opinion.

(11) Did anyone bother to ask if Meyer ever disclosed that he had a personal, close relationship amounting to a conflict with someone close to the plaintiff during Meyer’s investigation of the lawsuit plaintiff during the assignment of an investigator?

(12) After learning that Meyer had a personal, close relationship amounting to a conflict with someone close to the plaintiff during Meyer’s investigation of the lawsuit plaintiff, what disciplinary action, if any, was taken?

(13) Did our Police and Fire Commission take any substantive review of the Meyer lawsuit or Star packaging raid?

That’s a rhetorical question — the minutes of that shallow group show no thoughtfulness whatever.

(14) If you’re a member of the Police and Fire Commission, what possible, worthy use have you been to the city?

(15) If it should be true that the City Manager has an oversight role in all this — what oversight has there been?

That’s why one writes — there is no personal matter here — and yet, there is no trivial public one. I would not compromise in this city, or any other, in the asking of these questions. Nor would I think that any personal connection, small circle, etc., could ever matter more. I would never place acquaintance or society ahead of these questions and their answers, and I would readily discard any personal connection that fell on the opposing divide of these issues.

I would prefer there were no other issues in Whitewater, even again. That’s a preference in vain; I will take the same position again when conscience requires.

Well, if settlement in this case represented anything good for the city, would it not have been writ large on the front page of the Whitewater Register?

Settlement was a disgrace for the city, as I once wrote when it seemed possible:

Larry Meyer’s career has been bad for the city, and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can’t put Larry back together again. For every empty but strident defense from Chief Jim Coan, to all the support in the world from his friends in Elkhorn, one truth remains: Meyer is offering settlement on a federal lawsuit about a citizen’s Fourth Amendment rights. That’s no simple mistake — he’s settling on a constitutional claim. He will contend that he’s admitted no wrong-doing, but that’s whistling past the graveyard. Meyer would not likely have settled — not Meyer, nor any other excuse-making, self-justifying member of the Whitewater Police Department — if he’d been more confident of his conduct.

Wait — I thought that this was a completely, entirely, wholly, unquestionably professional force, etc., etc? That’s only a smattering of what Coan likely tells his officers — and insists to the world — about his department. He speaks about them the way a righteous man speaks about a saint. We’re a city of ordinary men and women, doing the best that we can in challenging times. Citizens are neither saints nor prophets; nor do I expect that ordinary people will turn water into wine. It’s shameful, risible, galling, and impious how Coan elevates his staff. Small wonder that they perform poorly: they’re unaccountable.

The former editor of the Regsiter once contended that she would cover a story when charges were file in Elkhorn, to which I replied about the constitutional lawsuit against Meyer and the Whitewater Police Department:

…if litigation were the standard, then the Register should be covering in great detail the federal constitutional suit against former Whitewater police investigator Larry Meyer. I’ve not noticed that coverage; no one else has either.

A few scraps in out-of-town papers; nothing valuable locally. If you’re Whitewater’s hometown paper, then you should cover the case in detail, and its implications for the city; a real news site would investigate.

We have no real press within the city; we are so far from one, one wonders what would happen if we did.

No matter. I will ask those questions in my next post.

Next: Pending Questions.

The constitutional lawsuit against Larry Meyer and the police department he served in our small town was filed in May 2005. It was settled, and the case closed, in September 2008.

One might imagine that, during the pendency of the suit, investigator Meyer (now retired from the force), might have had a different profile. Not because one must assume that the allegations of the complaint to be meritorious, but because a community with a respect for the federal judicial process might wish to avoid disregarding a pending constitutional action.

Propriety expects more than right conduct, but even the appearance of conduct unbecoming. Now I know that our officials in the city do not like to be lectured this way. I will offer two replies.

First, one has a right to comment this way, and neither your office nor your delicate, tender sensibilities shall trump this right.

Second, if one wishes not to be lectured, then at least I would suggest that one stop lecturing. Inapt, pedantic quotations from Confucius, or on enlightenment, leave me unimpressed. This ersatz philosophizing is lawful, but almost a self-parody to my ears. It is enough to govern the city justly; the rest is best left to others. The city hires for a desk, and not a sham pulpit.

After the Fourth Amendment violations were alleged against Meyer in 2005, what else happened, that one can recall? Oh, now, you fine historians of the city, why this lacuna, this odd gap of events in 2006?

You know very well that Meyer acted in a significant, vital way in the Star Packaging raid, in which
I once wrote that “The Whitewater police tell us, repeatedly, that the Star Packaging raid, and their former requests of motorists for Social Security numbers, were efforts to prevent identity theft.”

Now, I have written before that I think the idea of significant identity theft in this matter was an excuse. (See, The Identity Theft Excuse.)

But who was a lead local investigator on the Star Packaging raid? You know very well that it was Meyer. Why Meyer, though? No one had the sense to see – no, the true professionalism to see — that someone else should play this role until the resolution of a federal lawsuit in which Meyer was named defendant?

Re-accreditation, fancy patrol car lights and decals, foot patrols — they are as light as tissue paper when compared to a mistake of this kind.

No laminated plaque will rehabilitate a departmental leadership so dense as this. Dense, and dense enough to think that it might be rehabilitated through trinkets. You have as much likelihood of rehabilitating with magic rocks and a chicken wishbone.

What was that raid, by the way?

Immigration attorney Erich Straub said the 10 employees he represents in their deportation battles are ones who were able to post bail and get out of jail. He thinks at least one other worker, represented by another attorney, remains in the country, fighting to stay here. Most of the other 14 employees, Straub thinks, were deported back to Mexico. “You can challenge (a deportation) order, but if you’re not able to post bond, you’re challenging it from jail,” Straub said. “The process is not fast. You could end up in jail from six to 24 months. A lot of people decide it’s not worth it and they decide it’s best to go home (to their native country)….”

The 10 people Straub represents are seven women and three men, most of whom are in their 20s and 30s, with a few in their 40s, Straub said. “As far as I’ve seen, I don’t think one of my clients has a criminal record,” Straub said. “They are mothers and fathers. They have children. They have families. They are hard working. They’re hard-working families that are trying to make a living here in the United States of America and they’re law abiding. But for the immigration allegations against them, they are not criminals. They’re not out there creating havoc and preying on society.”

Next: Our Silent Press

On May 24th, 2005, Whitewater resident Steve Cvicker filed a federal lawsuit against Whitewater Police Department investigator Larry Meyer, individually and as a member of that department, among other parties. The case closed on September 15, 2008, with a signed stipulation for dismissal, following settlement.

Four years is not a long time for litigation, although more so in the federal system than in many state cases. It is enough time, during the pendency of the action, for a municipality and its employees to consider carefully their actions, and conduct, regarding a citizen’s claims.

Here I refer not to a legal response, but to a broader reflection that may be conducted even during litigation. A case like this will have many docket entries, stretching over years; the Meyer case, 05-cv-00576, is no exception (with over 100 entries).

If there is anyone, in the City of Whitewater, who pompously tells you that reflection and reform during a case is impossible, you may be certain that he is either ignorant, stupid, or a self-interested liar.

(We have all three groups in Whitewater, as every town does; there is much lay certainty in Whitewater among those who are unknowing. It’s as credible as if you heard someone at a bus stop who causally mentioned his latest effort to perfect a working fusion reactor using a ‘Brussard,’ design. Possible, but highly unlikely.)

I will offer three posts on the Meyer case: this brief overview, intervening events, how the press has managed to cover the case, and a collection of questions arising from it.

First, a recap as I have previously posted, with newer developments added. These are principal, but not all, developments in this constitutional lawsuit.

May 25, 2005, Whitewater resident Steve Cvicker filed a lawsuit in federal court against Whitewater investigator Larry Meyer, among others, alleging constitutional and civil rights violations. The case was assigned to federal Magistrate Judge William Callahan. Defendants subsequently answered, later amending their answer, to Cvicker’s complaint.

June 29, 2006, Defendant, Larry Meyer filed a motion for Summary Judgment (that is, that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a matter of law).

March 20, 2007, Judge Callahan denied Defendant, Larry Meyer’s motion for summary judgment regarding alleged constitutional violations of the Fourth Amendment. Cvicker’s lawsuit on those weighty grounds would continue; only his statutory claims were set aside.

May 14, 2007, Plaintiff, Cvicker submitted reports from his expert witnesses. Those expert reports included a well-experienced expert’s assessment of (1) the evasive, incomplete answers that Meyer gave under sworn deposition regarding his ‘investigation’ of Cvicker, and (2) Meyer’s unprofessional conduct and conduct in significant excess of his search warrant, involving seizure of personal items that led to the basis of Cvicker’s constitutional Fourth Amendment claim against Cvicker.

November 15, 2007, Defendant, Meyer submitted a motion to enforce a supposed settlement agreement between the parties and to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice.

December 20, 2007, Plaintiff, Cvicker filed his brief in opposition to Meyer’s motion to dismiss.

January 22, 2008, Magistrate Judge William E Callahan Jr denied Defendant’s Motion to Enforce Settlement.

September 15, 2008, Magistrate Judge William E Callahan, Jr signs stipulation and dismissal on 9/15/08.

These suits are rare, especially so for a city so small as Whitewater, Wisconsin. One might expect that it might be met with some self-reflection.

Of course not — the failure that leads to this a lawsuit like this shuns introspection and self-reflection. There is nothing more predictable and commonplace than saying nothing, changing nothing.

You may save slogans, quotations, and an insistence on politeness as though it were a virtue from God Himself — it is enough to govern well.

Next: The Intervening Event.

Here is Part 2 of my post on the 8/20 PFC meeting.

Freedom of Expression Resolution. In the spring, the Common Council, on a 5-2 vote, passed a resolution re-affirming rights of free expression.

The resolution was reviewed, but not adopted at the August PFC meeting. The reception – but not adoption – offers insight into authority of the Council, PFC, and leadership of the police department.

It is true that the PFC, and neither Council nor City Manager, oversees the Whitewater Police Department. If you ever read on a city website or elsewhere that the City Manager oversees the police department, that’s misleading and incomplete. Authority does not run from the City Manager, around the PFC, on major matters of promotions, etc. Approval authority runs from the PFC to the department.

(Quick question: when the City Manager recently celebrated a promotion within the department, did the PFC approve it first? If it did not, then why did it do so in other cases? If the PFC has approved validly in some cases but not others, then why not explain – in the City Manager’s Weekly Report, the distinction? That would be good and common policy elsewhere, but it’s ignored here. To defer to others is to fail the city.)

I’ll ask another question: What does it mean when a member of the PFC, when asked to adopt the resolution, remarks that a member of Council said it (freedom of speech, presumably) was “already stated in the Constitution.” One can re-affirm what appears already.

More to the point, what value is a member of the PFC who cannot read the Constitution for himself, rather than rely on the opinion of someone on Council? There must be more than one copy of the Constitution in the city, and as it is already clear, the PFC has independent authority to consider the matter.

A man, presumably literate, having talked, preached, and chatted up residents of the city for years, might have the occasion to read and decide for himself. No need to look elsewhere: one who can open a great Book can read a slender Constitution. A member of a commission like this should be able to exercise his own research and review, of a document that, after all, should be familiar to him in his voluntarily assumed role.

If I applied to a board on geometry, one might expect that I knew a bit of Euclid. Relying on other residents, politicians, CliffsNotes, etc. just lacks respectable diligence.

It hardly matters how one receives a resolution, or often if one adopts it at all; it is enough to see that receiving with ‘appreciation,’ without independent reflection, is part laughable, part shame.

Next PFC meeting, according to the notes: November 19th. How many even know?

I will finish the week (my posting week ending on Saturday), with a series on the constitutional lawsuit against Meyer and the City of Whitewater.

No one who has followed this suit would be surprised that we have a PFC that’s ineffectual. If we had better oversight, we would have fewer embarrassments. Instead, we have more embarrassments than we can handle, and if the city could sell them to other communities, we would have a fine side business in these troubled times.

I’ll post now on the latest Police and Fire Commission Meeting, from August, as a prelude to a week-ending series of posts on the constitutional lawsuit against Meyer and the City of Whitewater.

I will devote Saturday to that series on the lawsuit, and what it so clearly tells about our leadership and politics. (FREE WHITEWATER‘s posting week runs from Sunday through Saturday.)

Earlier posts on the Police and Fire Commission are available through this online link.

There are many posts because the deficiencies of the PFC are many.

In this post, I will, in part, refer to a resolution on free expression from the City of Whitewater’s Common Council. The text of that resolution also is available online.

In almost all situations in which a public commission performs poorly, and with limited public attention, there is no change in the behavior of the commission. Shameless in the beginning, shameless to the end.

The idea that people in these settings change is false – they’ve been set in their ways, feel they are justified, and do what they want. Libertarians at Reason and other prominent publications and foundations may spend years on a topic before seeing even the slightest movement, if any.

A critic of public action should be prepared to offer criticism over months and years. There is no end – just the exercise of principled criticism when occasion arises, without cessation after any number of occasions.

Some have written and asked if I have cooled to criticizing the mediocrity of our police leadership, its overseers, and fellow-traveler apologists. Not at all – I have published less of this topic recently, but municipal buffoonery deserves no respite.

I see, though, that more timely criticism is merited. (The only advantage for libertarian criticism of Whitewater’s police leadership is that one need not wait long until the next, embarrassing or ill-considered action.)

The Whitewater Police and Fire Commission last met – by posted record at any rate — in August. The body is scheduled to meet quarterly. The minutes of that last meeting are available in draft form on the City of Whitewater website.)

(One knows they are in DRAFT form because, if one squints carefully, one can see the word DRAFT in one and one-half inch letters running diagonally across each page. As the minutes will not typically be reviewed and approved until the next quarterly meeting, DRAFT form in Whitewater is a long-term condition.)

Citizen Comments.
As you would expect, no citizen comments. Look through the minutes of many meetings, and you find the same thing. There are two possibilities: that (1) everything goes so well, citizens feel no need to comment, or that (2) no one sees value in commenting under the present condition of the board. You can guess that Chief Coan, and many others, are more likely convinced of the former.

Why not televise the meetings, publicize them with better notice, and see if that’s still true? Not merely for one meeting, but for a few years. (Some wanted a two or three year period to test certain regulations for our Downtown. Is the oversight of a police force not as worthy of a multi-year test? Those who fear public review are the only ones to resist this openness.)

Drinking. PFC member Wendt, according to the notes, remarked that there was a recent proposal of college presidents “who are in favor of lowering the drinking age to 18, in hopes that there would possibly be less drinking.” The PRC minutes may be wrong, but if they are accurate, then Wendt is wrong about the proposal – the college presidents’ joint statement called for a debate on the subject, but did not advocate a solution.

According to the minutes (sorry, no video from which to make a transcript), here are Chief Coan’s remarks on the matter:

Chief Coan mentioned some were strongly against the proposed change. When the drinking age was 18 in Whitewater it was raucous, with drinking in dorms. It contributes to family problems, disorderly conduct, and promotes more drinking.”

Mass hysteria. If the past were truly better, as so many contend, how could a past with an 18 year old drinking age be better? Raucous? That can’t be better.

I received this press release from the Alzheimer’s Association that I am happy to post -

Coffee, Cookies and Conversation — Open Forum on Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementia

The Alzheimer’s Association is hosting “Coffee, Cookies and Conversation” for community members who wish to learn more about Alzheimer’s disease or a related dementia on Wednesday, December 10, 2008 from 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. at the UW-Parkside Center for Community Partnerships, Tallent Hall Orchard Room, 900 Wood Road in Kenosha. This program is free and open to the public.

Have you or a loved one recently been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease or another dementia? If so, this open forum session will provide an opportunity to get questions answered and for participants to discover how the Alzheimer’s Association can help. The program will be presented by Paulette Kissee, CSW, Regional Services Manager, Alzheimer’s Association.

Reservations are required for this program; for information or to register, please contact Paulette Kissee at 262-595-2387 or via email at paulette.kissee@alz.org.

The Alzheimer’s Association is a national non-profit organization dedicated to eliminating Alzheimer’s disease through the advancement of research and to enhance care and support for individuals, their families, and caregivers. The Alzheimer’s Association of Southeastern Wisconsin provides information, education, and support to people with Alzheimer’s and related dementias, their families, and healthcare professionals throughout an 11-county region. For more information about Alzheimer’s disease and chapter services visit www.alz.org/sewi or call the toll-free, 24-hour Helpline at 800-272-3900.

I received this press release from the Alzheimer’s Association that I am happy to post -

Family Caregiver Conference Planned for Whitewater — Sessions to Offer Resources and Knowledge to Empower Family Caregivers

The Alzheimer’s Association is offering a Family Caregiver Conference on Friday, December 5, 2008, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. at the Irvin L. Young Memorial Library, 431 West Center Street in Whitewater. The conference will feature a series of topics relating to caring for a loved one who has Alzheimer’s disease or a related dementia. The cost to attend this event is $10, and includes refreshments.

The conference is geared toward the needs of family caregivers, and will offer a series of sessions which will cover communication tips and information on caregiver stress. The featured presenter at the conference is Lynda Markut, Workplace Education Coordinator, Alzheimer’s Association. Lynda will address the difficulties that families face as they strive to understand each other while providing care in her presentation, “Dealing with Family Challenges: Could a Family Meeting Work for You?”.

In addition, Lynda will cover the spectrum of communication changes in individuals with various types of dementia and the communication techniques that can be effective in her presentation, “Communication Changes and Challenges in Dementia Care”. Resource specialists from the newly formed Aging and Disability Resource Centers in Walworth and Jefferson Counties will be present.

For information on this conference, or to register, please contact the Alzheimer’s Association receptionist at 414-479-8800 or via the 24/7 Helpline at 800-272-3900.

The Alzheimer’s Association is a national non-profit organization dedicated to eliminating Alzheimer’s disease through the advancement of research and to enhance care and support for individuals, their families, and caregivers. The Alzheimer’s Association provides information, education, and support to people with Alzheimer’s and related dementias, their families, and healthcare professionals throughout an 11-county region. For more information about Alzheimer’s disease and local chapter services visit www.alz.org/sewi or call the toll-free, 24-hour Helpline at 800-272-3900.