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.