In a Janesville Gazette interview, Whitewater City Manager Kevin M. Brunner reveals how unaccountable is the city’s position involving property damage to a resident, how quickly he’ll hide behind someone else, and how shameless is his self-righteous posturing.
Over at the Janesville Gazette, there’s a story about Lt. Joseph Cull, a Whitewater resident and citizen who experienced tens of thousands of dollars damage to his home from a Whitewater sewer backup. See, Marine Fighting Whitewater for Repair Costs.
(I have no connection to Lt. Cull, and my remarks are wholly my own.)
I’ve posted before on the story, first reported at WISC-TV in Madison. See, Accountability Begins….Somewhere Other than in Whitewater, Wisconsin, Inside (Whitewater) and Outside (America), and Anatomy of a Municipal Bureaucrat’s Explanation.
Brunner’s position in the interview shifts, but only to the detriment of his reputation and that of the city he manages.
Consider his latest remarks:
Brunner said the problem now is out of the city’s hands.
“We feel terrible when this happens to anyone – and doubly so with this poor property owner who is serving his country thousands of miles from home – but the plain fact of the matter is it doesn’t make any difference who the person is; we have to look at the circumstances of the claim, he said.
“It comes down to, ‘Did we know anything about this? Was it due to negligence on our part?’ and our insurance company has said, ‘No.’ ”
Local service groups are working on ideas to help Cull pay for the damage at his home, and city officials said they will cooperate with anyone who comes forward to help with fundraising.
Unaccountability. Brunner manages this city, but he won’t take responsibility for a decision about the actual operation of city services.
He declares, “It comes down to, ‘Did we know anything about this? Was it due to negligence on our part?’ and our insurance company has said, ‘No.’ ”
Who really manages this town? When Brunner asks if anyone knew anything, or if it was negligence, he doesn’t provide his own answer. He says that “our insurance company has said, ‘No.’ ”
Is this a joke?
Here’s a man who — no matter what he thinks of himself — is not press-ready. He’s not even ordinary person-ready. Someone answering this way just makes himself look ridiculous.
Brunner discards the expression, “I’ll get to the bottom of this,” and replaces it with “Umm…ah…let me ask…ah…my insurance company.”
Hand-washing. Is anyone surprised that Brunner would contend that it’s not his — or the City of Whitewater’s — problem? Of course not. In fact, he puts a new cast on an old expression: When the news gets tough, Brunner gets going. Somewhere, anywhere.
(As Oshkosh and Janesville wouldn’t have him, he’s still our problem bureaucrat.)
There’s a City of Whitewater task force for every problem under the sun, and regulation for almost every aspect of life, but now, Brunner cannot be troubled.
When it’s not his gain, it’s your pain.
The Appearance of Sympathy. Brunner contends that he feels sorry for “this poor property owner.” Please. Brunner’s supposed sympathy repairs…. absolutely nothing.
In his August 28th Weekly Report, Brunner tried — laughably — to identify with the injured property owner. By suggesting that since he once had a much smaller version of this problem, a resident should lump it, too, Brunner shows his community betterment rhetoric is rhetoric alone.
Sham Charity. What’s Brunner’s idea of charity, of helping a resident, as part of a better community? In his Weekly Report, Brunner wrote that “We have been in touch with some community groups that are interested in possibly raising money for him….”
I thought that was tentative and unworthy.
Oh, but look what he says now. The Gazette reports that “Local service groups are working on ideas to help Cull pay for the damage at his home, and city officials said they will cooperate with anyone who comes forward to help with fundraising.”
In his Weekly Report, Brunner wrote that “we [the Administration] have been in touch with some community groups,” but now one sees what that means. His administration is taking a passive role and they’ll cooperate with anyone who comes forward.
Cooperate.
So when private citizens do all the work, Brunner will stand with them, or write about it, to get some credit for himself.
Shameless, Self-righteous Posturing. Worst of all, far worse than washing his hands of the damage, is Brunner’s feeble attempt to position himself as — wait for it — above favoritism or partiality. The City Manager contends that “…but the plain fact of the matter is it doesn’t make any difference who the person is; we have to look at the circumstances of the claim.”
Brunner ignores what Lt. Cull himself said — on camera and published in print and online — about why he wants compensation.
Here’s what Lt. Cull said: “My service over here is strictly voluntary and I don’t think the city of Whitewater owes me anything for it. But what I do think they owe me for is the fact that I pay taxes, just like everybody else who lives on my street.”
Cull isn’t claiming preferential treatment — he’s asking for ordinary respect and municipal accountability.
Brunner is shameless — all self-righteousness — preening as though the refusal to compensate was a step against favoritism. (That’s temerity — Brunner posturing against favoritism as leader of a city lousy with complaints about unfair and unequal enforcement.)
Unpersuasive, too, is Brunner’s attempt to contend that “…we have to look at the circumstances of the claim.”
What does he mean, we?
He told the Gazette that “our insurance company has said, ‘No’ to questions of liability.
Not Brunner, not one of the task forces he may have created, not even a PowerPoint he once saw — no, the insurance company.
That’s not a “we.” That’s an “it.”
Unless, of course, Brunner’s forgotten for whom he works.
Here’s a gentleman who cannot offer a coherent, consistent explanation in his own Weekly Report, or an interview thereafter.