Good morning.
Thursday in Whitewater will be sunny with a high of 50. Sunrise is 7:12 and sunset 4:20 for 9h 08m 25s of daytime. The moon is a waning crescent with 28.9% of its visible disk illuminated.
Whitewater’s Board of Zoning Appeals meets at 6 PM.
On this day in 1941, the Imperial Japanese Navy carries out a surprise attack on the United States Pacific Fleet and its defending Army and Marine air forces at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. Japanese forces simultaneously invade Shanghai International Settlement, Malaya, Thailand, Hong Kong, the Philippines, and the Dutch East Indies.
Embedded above is a video of the 12.5.23 meeting of the Whitewater Common Council. Yesterday’s post addressed the negligence of this council president on agenda Item 16 about basic council self-governance. See The Council President’s (Willful) Negligence.
Two other parts of the meeting stand out.
Individual Requests. Some members of the council care more about an issue than others, and will express concern when they (as one or two members of a seven-person body) don’t receive the answers they want when they want. One or two members’ expectation of individual service on larger projects is a (chronic) misunderstanding of collective governance. About a requested study of salary comparatives, this misunderstanding arose yet again. The discussion begins at 28:24 on the recording above. Here, as in the past, Councilmember Allen will sometimes speak in the plural (“So we’ve asked you for we’ve given you the list twice now”) when “we” refers to one or two and not a majority of the council. Of individuals requesting as a mere faction, see Scenes from a Council Meeting (Representations) (“what we’re looking to do here” emphasis added) and Micromanaging the City of Whitewater’s Human Resources Work (“Many years ago, a conservative councilmember rebuked a colleague for expecting that individual members have the authority to assign work or projects to city staff. That conservative councilmember was right — it’s a collective body, and individual members aren’t empowered that way.”)
Lack of Support for Claims. It’s odd, but now also a recurring oddity, that one or two council members will make a claim, but when asked will lack information to support their claim. They’re the ones who will present the claim, but then be unable to substantiate it.
At the Tuesday night session, Councilmember Allen contended that some communities requested as part of a salary comparison were omitted from a city-supplied list, but when asked if he had examples of omissions (“Could you give me a specific example?”) Allen’s reply was “Right now, no.” Video at 29:55. Allen’s quick attempt to supply a few omissions mentioned only cities that had, in fact, been included on the list. Video at 30:00.
Later, Allen suggests to Councilmember Gerber that she, Gerber, had not received some salary information Gerber had requested. Here’s the discussion beginning at 50:09:
City Manager: What Rachelle’s saying is that she provided that information.
Finance Director Rachelle Blitch: That was provided on October 25th. It’s in the agenda packet.
Councilmember Allen: Jill, there’s other information that you have not received it.
Councilmember Gerber: I don’t remember. I don’t recall not saying she hasn’t, I just don’t recall.
Method.
Earlier at 30:27, the city’s Human Resources makes the point that any reasonable person should grasp:
So one thing I just want to mention, that’s hopefully what the metrics will help us look at, given that information. And then we can use that to determine who actually which communities are the most comfortable based on not only population, but shared revenue, spending, all of those things.
Honest to goodness, isn’t that obvious? The best practice is to complete a wide study and narrow it after reviewing that study’s data. Cherry-picking now invites errors later by idiosyncratic inclusion or omission.
We’re a beautiful city of thousands who properly grasp the concept of collective governance and the need for evidentiary support for one’s own claims. Whitewater’s residents can grasp these concepts quite well. Any misunderstandings are, so to speak, more specific and particular.
Fly through James Webb Space Telescope’s view of 5000 galaxies in 3D visualization:
In the spirit of Madison’s Federalist No. 10, it’s insightful to observe the dynamics within our Whitewater Common Council, especially the emerging factions that mirror the very concerns Madison warned against. One such faction, notably comprising Councilmembers Gerber and Allen, seems to exemplify a classic case of Madison’s feared factions: a small group driven by self-interest, often at odds with the broader needs of the community.
This faction’s actions often appear selfish and myopic, driven by personal agendas rather than the collective good of Whitewater. Their demands, frequently issued without substantial evidence or rationale, undermine the council’s efficiency. This behavior echoes Madison’s concerns about factions being driven by passions unmoored from reason.
More concerning is their tendency to levy accusations without presenting concrete evidence, a practice that not only hampers constructive debate but also erodes trust in our democratic processes. Such actions are in stark contrast to the ideals of transparent, evidence-based governance.
Moreover, their more than occasional deviation from truth, as perceived by many in our community, raises serious ethical questions. It’s a troubling sign when elected officials, expected to be custodians of public trust, indulge in misinformation or half-truths.
The second faction within our council comprises two newer members, who unfortunately seem to be under the influence of the first faction led by Gerber and Allen. These members, though new and earnest, appear to be manipulated into supporting motions and ideas that do not align with the best interests of the council or our community. This susceptibility to manipulation and misinformation is a concern, as it can lead to decisions that are not only deceitful but also detrimental to the collective welfare.
However, it’s important to recognize that these members are still in the early stages of their tenure and possess the potential to evolve into effective, independent leaders. Their fresh perspectives and willingness to learn are assets. It is imperative for the community and their fellow council members to support their growth into roles where they can contribute positively and constructively, free from undue influence.
The third faction consists of three members who consistently demonstrate a commitment to the community’s best interests. They often stand in opposition to the detrimental influences of the first faction, demonstrating a commendable willingness to endure personal attacks and misinformation campaigns for the sake of protecting community welfare and integrity. These members exemplify the ideal of public servants who prioritize the greater good over personal or factional interests.
Their actions often reflect an understanding of the council’s role as a body that should work collaboratively for the collective benefit, even when it means challenging dominant factions. Their willingness to break from factional pressures and stand up for staff and community interests, despite the risk of personal repercussions, is a testament to their dedication and integrity.
While Madison acknowledged the inevitability of factions in a free society, he also stressed the importance of controlling their effects. In the context of our council, this means fostering a culture of accountability, where actions and decisions are made in the full view of public scrutiny and in alignment with the community’s best interests. It’s essential for us as a community to be vigilant against the dangers of factions that operate contrary to the common good. We must encourage and support current and future council members who show a commitment to serving the public interest and foster a council culture that values evidence-based, transparent decision-making for the benefit of all in Whitewater.
This is a solid, insightful assessment of our city council. (The Federalist Papers are powerful as advocacy for a moment in our history, as political philosophy for all time, and also even as literature for their beauty.)
We’ve not one type of councilmember, and there is the possibility of evolution within that body (if not for each and every member, then for many): “However, it’s important to recognize that these members are still in the early stages of their tenure and possess the potential to evolve into effective, independent leaders. Their fresh perspectives and willingness to learn are assets. It is imperative for the community and their fellow council members to support their growth into roles where they can contribute positively and constructively, free from undue influence.” Yes, very true.
And looking ahead, could not agree more with your conclusion: “While Madison acknowledged the inevitability of factions in a free society, he also stressed the importance of controlling their effects. In the context of our council, this means fostering a culture of accountability, where actions and decisions are made in the full view of public scrutiny and in alignment with the community’s best interests. It’s essential for us as a community to be vigilant against the dangers of factions that operate contrary to the common good. We must encourage and support current and future council members who show a commitment to serving the public interest and foster a council culture that values evidence-based, transparent decision-making for the benefit of all in Whitewater.”
So well & admirably said.