FREE WHITEWATER

City

Open Letter: Race & Ethnicity?

by  • 

Update — 9/18/2007 — I see that the City of Whitewater has updated its demographics information, with a link entitled, “VIEW WHITEWATER’S DEMOGRAPHICS” to a U.S. Census document on Whitewater in 2000. It’s a predictable response: post to a U.S. government document, with the implication that nothing in a federal document could be unsuitable.

It’s all context, isn’t it? Sometimes one doesn’t trumpet, or display, all possible facts about a place. One would imagine that would be obvious to an administration that emphasizes ‘enlightenment,’ or the ‘success force,’ or similar vapid quotations about politeness and supposed insight. Yet all these banal, pop-psychology phrases come in place of a serious reliance on the canonical political documents of this republic.

It’s predicable — but none too clever — that an administration that’s been silent (especially when it matters) on absurd candidacies and over-reaching authority would link to a third-party document. If I had bet on the matter, I would have staked on this likely response.

There is one great advantage, to me, of the city’s choice of demographics document — its data will be the starting point for a series on economics and poverty that I’ll begin later this week. Thanks, city officials, for making the beginning of that series that much easier.

Update — 9/11/07 — the City of Whitewater has now removed the link entitled Demographics from its website.

I love this small city, and I am convinced that it’s a place worth reforming.

Faithful readers well know that, near the time this website first started, I published a post in May about a now-defunct Community Development Authority webpage that listed our city’s demographics as “White, Non-minority 95%.” Here is the image of that page. Here’s what I wrote about that odd reference to race on that webpage:

1. Why would the Community Development Authority describe our workforce as “white, non-minority” when the law itself forbids hiring based on racial preference?

2. Who are “non-minorities?” Would Jews, or Mormons, for example, be considered minorities?

3. If the goal were diversity in hiring, why not directly mention by group those who are “non-white, minority” rather than emphasize whites, and leave others out by express exclusion?

4. Who actually wrote this description of our workforce?

5. From the point of view of the free market, why would race matter? Education, or experience in previous jobs, of course. But race?

I can find no similar statistics (’white, non-minority’) listed for neighboring Fort Atkinson’s website, and that’s unsurprising: the Whitewater Community Development description of our workforce speaks for itself, and its authors, and none too well.

In reply, CDA director Mary Nimm wrote to me that she had “no explanation for the content on the site today as it was
created / written by those before me. Since coming to the CDA in November of last year, I have been working with our IT department to gain control of the site for updates and redesign. You can expect numerous changes to be made over the next few months.”

Fair enough; patience is justified.

Now, months later, there’s a section entitled “About Whitewater — Demographics” on the City of Whitewater’s website. Here’s part of what it says, as of this posting:

RACE AND ETHNICITY
White 12,395
Black or African American 315
American Indian and Alaska native 36
Asian 197
Native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 2
Some other race 333
Two or more races 159
Hispanic or Latino 873

There’s more:

PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE OR ETHNICITY
Per capita income 13,965
White 14,214
Black or African American 11,046
Native American 11,514
Asian 13,244
Native Hawaiian and Pacific islander 620
Some other race 10,429
Two or more races 9,455
Hispanic or Latino 8,699

I have links listed below to seven other Wisconsin municipal websites, and not one of them – not one of them – has demographics like these, with an enumeration of race and ethnicity listed. Feel free to visit these other municipal websites of our neighbors and see if you find anything like what we have described here. You won’t.

City of Fort Atkinson
City of Jefferson
City of Elkhorn
City of Janesville
City of Milwaukeee
City of Madison
City of La Crosse

This peculiar catalog of race and ethnicity on our City of Whitewater website is contrary to the fundamental political traditions of the United States and the State of Wisconsin. As for America, Lincoln was right when he said that, ultimately, it was the Declaration of Independence’s recognition that all were created equal that underlay our constitutional tradition.

The State of Wisconsin, in our own state constitution, proudly and correctly declares that

ARTICLE I, SECTION 1. All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Those are beautiful, noble, and virtuous words, and our legal foundation.

The City of Whitewater website should be more than a shabby genealogist’s newsletter, or a scattering of census information; it should represent the fundamental traditions of equality under the law without regard to race and ethnicity. Why, then, the odd interest in enumerating ethnic groups on the Demographics page? Is there no one who’s not aware of what this reasonably suggests about us? Is there no one who didn’t have a second thought about whether this information mattered? (Our neighboring cities knew better. Why can’t we do better?)

We declare to the world that we have so many Norwegians, so many Germans, etc. If a Norwegian or two moves away, and Italians arrive, what difference could it make? None that should matter to this city.

Imagine yourself at a party. It’s a refined affair, of the sort that the fancy love to attend. The hostess turns to you, to introduce you to her other guests. She looks out across the spacious room, dressed elegantly as she is, and extends her hand in the direction of the assembled gathering. She announces for you, and all to hear, “Well, I have three Germans over there, a Czech near the fireplace, and some Italians on the veranda. My white guests earn the most, but I do have a few racial minorities in the kitchen. They make less than the others, though, but what is one to do?”

That’s worse than an impolite, insulting introduction; it’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how one should think about one’s guests. Why would we treat our fellow residents with that same sort of disgraceful introduction?

This is no matter of mere website design; this is a matter of core content, and what that content means. It’s a matter of leadership, accountability, and proper oversight.

I have no idea which person – as a leader in this town — is responsible for the passage entitled Demographics. I have no idea if a political leader — and this is a political leader’s job – bothered to review and approve this content for the City of Whitewater’s website. I do know that where I live in Whitewater – and in every other part of this lovely city – we deserve a better introduction for visitors than one that trumpets an un-American, exclusionary enumeration by ‘Race and Ethnicity.’ more >>

City, Free Markets, University

Common Council Meeting for September 4, 2007

by  • 

Here’s my commentary on the Common Council meeting for September 4th. It was quite an evening.

Drive-Through. The lively topic Tuesday was Council’s review of a Planning Commission endorsement (4-2) of a drive-through window for liquor sales at the Westsider. (I posted previously on the Planning Commission meeting where this recommendation was issued.) After a presentation from the Westsider’s owner, Council members and citizens discussed the drive-through.

What a wacky experience to watch one Council member badger others, fail to answer questions courteously, interrupt others frequently, and display a narrow, rigid demeanor almost all evening. That posture never plays well in person or on television, and it’s a quick ticket to political self-marginalization. (Although, quite candidly, I’m beginning to think that’s a destination already familiar to him.)

The best exchange of the evening was when that same Council member tried to distinguish between alcohol sales at Sentry (of which he apparently approves) and Wal-Mart (of which he likely does not). He was asked the clever, insightful question, “What’s different between Sentry and Wal-Mart” for sales procedures? His reply was to say that the question was a “loaded” one. What’s that reply supposed to mean? I’ll tell you what it means: it means someone asked you a perceptive question, and you didn’t have any clear, rational, convincing answer. It’s only loaded because you couldn’t provide a worthy reply.

Two things became clear: (1) someone didn’t approve much of alcohol sales in general (including questioning the prior approval of Wal-Mart’s license), and (2) the problem, gosh darn it, is all these bad, bad college students. It’s part of the false view that they’re wrecking the town. It’s like watching someone’s belligerent, when-I-was-a-kid-we-ate-bugs-for-supper uncle prattle on about how no one understands anymore. It conveys the impression of someone who might, at any moment, start complaining about how the town’s infested with shiftless, no-good punk kids.

One of the arguments against the drive-through was the Council member’s contention that he had talked to many people, and no one supported the idea. Too funny. Here’s someone who seems oblivious to the concept of selection or situation bias. It’s predictable that everyone says that to him. Selected acquaintances often either agree with one’s views on a subject, or know enough to pretend that they do.

This sort of approach has no broad-based appeal, and would not succeed city-wide. The best one will get out of this angry, frustrated delivery is to be on the losing side of a 6-1 vote in favor, which is what happened regarding the vote on a drive-though for the Westsider. The approval was a good decision, supporting sensible restrictions as proposed from a respected, established owner.

Banners in Town. Ms. Kienbaum suggested that businesses be allowed to display banners, to promote their merchandise, etc., and that the display of banners be impartially enforced. It’s a sensible, free-market friendly approach.

Oh, but there are aesthetic objections, and so one Council member insisted that the thirty-day limit on banners be enforced, lest the city be awash in signs and banners. That’s signs and banners, as opposed to vacant store fronts. By the way, why is thirty days’ time acceptable, but not thirty-one? It’s because one has to draw the line somewhere. Fair enough; let’s draw it where merchants have more opportunities to attract customers. If customers disapprove of banners, they’ll ignore them, or complain to merchants directly about them, and the incentive to display banners will disappear, and merchants will no longer buy them.

Why is this sort of petty restriction the government’s business? Perhaps, it’s because society would not accept the restriction, so someone badgers a municipal body to restrict private activity through municipal ordinances to enforce a narrow vision on others. Instead of a spontaneous order and a robust society, you have a hectoring, regulating, nanny state.

Apparently, some business people have used sandwich boards instead of banners, to get their message across. That, also, was too much for someone, who urged citizens to call the city and report supposed sandwich-board violators. Quick message to those involved: if you’re complaining about sandwich boards to the city, you have too much time on your hands, and should stop talking, and find something constructive to do.

(Ms. Kienbaum was definitely the saving grace of the evening. Do you wonder if she goes home at night and asks herself, “What’s wrong with some of these people?” No, I’m sure she doesn’t; it just wouldn’t be polite. That wouldn’t be her question; it would be my question.)

Nominations Committee. The key insight here was from Planning Board member Kristine Zaballos, who noted that when citizens have to interview in public for a public board, it’s a stressful experience. I see her point, but I wonder if there’s a way in which this prepares people who have a public role for potentially robust criticism? (Criticism that, as readers know – I support.) I’m not sure, though, that public interviewing is necessary, or the only way to assure that citizens selected for a public role are inured to public criticism. In any event, Mrs. Zaballos’s remarks conveyed the clear impression of having thought carefully about the nominations process.

A quick question for all concerned. By the time a citizen (not Mrs. Zaballos) is on four boards, is that person still an amateur in a public role? Aren’t you almost semi-pro by that point? (I’m teasing — be on as many as you feel, and others feel, you can productively manage.)

What We Know. What do we know, at the end of the night? That someone doesn’t like alcohol sales, doesn’t seem much to like the university, and doesn’t like banners from businesses because they just spoil the look of the town.

Where do these ideas and attitudes lead? They’re a combination of an alcohol-restricting Carrie Nation, a university-battling Ahab, a prying Mrs. Kravitz, all joined with the mortar of no-commercial-advertising restrictiveness.

That direction would place Whitewater right in the vicinity of the mess we’re in now, I think.

City

Observing Living Conditions

by  • 

Here’s the first numbered topic from a weekly city report:

1. Targeted Housing and Property Maintenance Code Enforcement Program to Begin Next Week

The City will begin a targeted housing and property maintenance enforcement program next week that will focus on the neighborhoods throughout the City but with particular emphasis on those surrounding the UW-Whitewater campus. With many student renters now living in these neighborhoods, the City Neighborhood Services Department will be
focusing on enforcing a variety of local housing code issues including building repairs, proper refuse toter storage and removal, lawn parking, debris and littering, outside house furniture and lawn/weed maintenance. In addition, the City will be observing living conditions to ascertain if the local requirement that no more than three unrelated persons per household may live in the city’s single-family residential zoning districts is being met.

Over the next month, Neighborhood Services Officers along with the Police Department Community Service Officers will be enforcing existing city ordinances. These officers will be working seven days a week and will be also distributing information to both landlords and renters on what city ordinances may pertain to them. As such, this
targeted program is intended to be not only enforcement but also educational in its focus.

As readers know, I support the rights of property owners to be free and protected from vandalism and damage to their property. It’s heartbreaking to hear homeowners describe how their homes have been damaged in retaliation for their efforts to report violations of municipal ordinances. (Ordinary homeowners describing their infuriating experiences were — by far — the most powerful part of a recent Common Council discussion of code enforcement.)

Not all means, unfortunately, are appropriate to an end. Consider, for example, two parts of the city’s enforcement plan. First, the stated intention that “…the City will be observing living conditions to ascertain if the local requirement that no more than three unrelated persons per household may live in the city’s single-family residential zoning districts is being met.”

Are you kidding? No, apparently not. These words were written, so far as I can tell, in earnestness.

I would support the discharge of duties in response to citizen complaints or concerns. Our small town has decided to go farther. We’ll actually be using municipal workers — on the city’s initiative — for “observing living conditions” to figure out how many unrelated persons might be in a household. This is more than an overly-intrusive, bad idea: it’s really rather odd and strange. “Honey, what did you do today at taxpayer’s expense? Well, dear, I was staking out rental housing to make sure that no more than three unrelated persons were living there.” A well-adjusted person wouldn’t want to do something like that, even for part of a day. A sensible and prudent person wouldn’t set it down as part of a city initiative.

There’s a real need for better enforcement, but this plan will only make the enforcement effort too controversial, and creepy, to be effective. Rather than a measured, incremental effort to make modest gains, opponents of enforcement will rightly observe that the plan for municipal observations will be (1) a likely waste of time for not observing anything conclusive, or (2) overly prying and intrusive in order to observe something conclusive. ‘Overly prying and intrusive’ is not the business of the city. There’s no cause for this city to begin affirmative action hiring for voyeurs, peeping toms, or the otherwise excessively curious.

As I wrote last week, our town would have shriveled and died long ago without the university. We’ve embarked on a municipal initiative to build better relations with the university, for our common benefit. Now, were risking unnecessary tension and community alienation with students of that same university. I’m not opposed to commercial fishing, but if Ahab told me that the Pequod would have to steer a course, around the whole world, in search of a white whale, I’d have reason to doubt the voyage. Call me Ishmael. There’s far, there’s too far, and then there’s excessive, creepy far.

It’s a foolish over-reaching of municipal authority. It fits, however, the thinking of a town clique brimming with a sense of entitlement, and a conviction that if they want to do something, their chosen means are legitimate. Considerations of humility, modesty, reserve, and limited government are quickly forgotten when it’s what they want; limitations only apply when they might, themselves, be the targets of enforcement.

Which brings us to the unfortunate use of the word ‘targeted’ enforcement. At the last Common Council meeting, one of the council members took great umbrage at the suggestion that he intended to imply that excessive numbers of renters in a residence might be a student problem. Of course he meant students. That’s what this discussion is about, and its disingenuous to pretend otherwise. The latest report doesn’t pretend; the report notes a “particular emphasis on those [areas] surrounding the UW-Whitewater campus.” Near the UW Whitewater campus: where students live. Thanks for clearing that up; I wasn’t quite sure before. I’ve also had trouble determining if the sun rises in the east, if bears actually relieve themselves in the woods, and if the Holy Father is a Roman Catholic. Perhaps you might drop me a line at adams@freewhitewater.com and set me straight on those points when you get a chance.

When the city is finished hunting students, take a moment to re-think the use of the term ‘targeted’ enforcement. The wrap on Whitewater (even more than other places) is that this city’s clique uses public enforcement authority unfairly, and enforces against others, but never among its own numbers. For example, municipal violations — no matter how obvious — seldom seem enforced against city workers, their friends, or relatives. By contrast, those not well-connected, or disliked for personal reasons, seem to experience a disproportionately high number of enforcement actions. There has been more than enough ‘targeting’ in this town, thank you very much. more >>

Holiday

Labor Day 2007

by  • 

Labor Day became a national holiday in 1894. Lincoln, right about so many things, was right about labor:

Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.

The poster that I have reproduced on FREE WHITEWATER today is part of the beautiful, haunting collection of Second World War posters available online at Northwestern University.

This poster from 1943 depicts labor at its best: private citizens of different races working together productively to defeat the enemies of free private laborers and all decent people. Hard, private efforts in support of a great, noble public cause: these are the laborers to whom I, and all others in this city, will be forever indebted.

Beautiful Whitewater

Beautiful Whitewater: The Crosswalk by Mulberry Glen

by  • 

There’s a new walkway crossing Main Street, connecting Maple Mulberry Glen with Sentry’s parking lot. It’s a good idea, and a small but useful civic improvement. We were right to place a similar walkway near the university. (UPDATE, 6:02 p.m. — I have no idea why I originally wrote Maple Glen for Mulberry Glen. Our town’s complex is called Mulberry; Maple Glen — wherever it may be — is a matter for others to consider.)

Motorists who wish to race past Whitewater may do so, via the bypass. Those driving along Main Street are more likely to have a local destination, and consequently be driving more slowly. Nonetheless, the street near Wal-Mart is stark, and looks fundamentally commercial; it’s an invitation to drive more quickly. The crosswalk is a useful, visible reminder that this stretch along Main includes several apartments, and that motorists should exercise caution as tenants might be crossing the street.

(The crosswalk accomplishes far more than stationing a patrol car near the Hawk Motel to catch speeders. The patrol car only serves to deter those it pulls over, and those who observe the subsequent ticketing. By the nature of the task, the officer and car are partially obscured for the assignment, and will eventually leave away when the task ends, or when boredom and banality take their toll.)

The crosswalk is an ever-present reminder that pedestrian-tenant are in the area, and also guides them on a path to take across Main Street.

Cartoons & Comics

Friday Cartoon Feature

by  • 

Here’s this Friday-morning’s cartoon feature from FREE WHITEWATER.

This week’s clip is a Wood Woodpecker cartoon. In the early Woody Woodpecker cartoons, Woody was frenetic, and just plain nuts; only later did he become a tamer, more conventional character. Quick Trivia: Although Woody had a distinctive laugh from his earliest cartoons, that laugh probably originated with an earlier character, and was merely made popular with Woody.

In this cartoon from 1941, Pantry Panic, Woody endures a disastrous winter, and battles a competitor for the limited food available.

Enjoy.

more >>

University

The University

by  • 

We are scarcely one community, but several: a town itself divided, and divided again from the campus in its very midst.

Whitewater has fourteen thousand residents, and of that latest number, a few thousand are college student residents. Out total population would be noticeably lower without those university students.

Our local society and economy depend mightily on the university. Our small city would be ruined without the campus; the loss of that many people, vibrant and creative, would sink Whitewater. The campus will not move, of course. The point I wish to make is that we’d collapse as a local economy without the university.

There is more to the campus, though, than dollars-and-cents. Our small society is larger — actually and figuratively — with the campus here in town. The natural vigor and energy of the university prevents Whitewater from ossifying. We’d be closer to a small, stagnant community without the campus. It is our competitive advantage, in so many ways, if only we would direct this unique opportunity toward a better relationship.

City, Development, Free Markets

Planning and Architectural Review Commission Meeting for Monday, 8/27

by  • 

A few, quick observations on Monday night’s planning and architectural review commission meeting.

Where we are weaker than nearby cities, we should be less restrictive than they are; where we are stronger, we should be no more restrictive.

We live well, as beneficiaries of a free market, but we quickly forget how dynamic and innovative our markets truly are. Planning often takes place as though there were no free market. We might as easily be manorial England, or bureaucratic France, as free enterprise America. (These three are neither morally nor practically equivalent.)

Planning does not go wrong for lack of rationality; it goes wrong for hyper-rationality.

Appeals to public policy as an obstacle to private development are banal and trite unless they are enumerated and detailed.

In a more productive arrangement, a private owner could present his or her ideas to a municipal commission like ours without requiring a lawyer. That was possible only for some Monday night.

There will always near hundreds of details to consider; most of them should be left to private parties, without the interference of the state.

Knowledge and instinct vary. A more sensible, less capricious, person will know to look to other communities for evidence of the success or failure of a like proposal. A less capable person will rely on one or two vague principles, or — far worse — scramble to raise stalling objection after stalling objection.

This sort of meeting makes sense, of course, but in more than one way. The arrangement provides order, but also personal benefit. It’s a cost to productivity, sometimes small, sometimes large. A salaried public official or lawyer accustomed to this forum, benefits. The only important matter, though, is that we can say the same for our small city.

Theoretical concerns about safety that are not experienced in like situations elsewhere are dubious. If experience tells us that, elsewhere, there’s no harm in a like measure, suggestions that the proposal might be harmful in Whitewater are ignorant or attention-getting. Either way, we may confidently ignore these meddlesome objections.

Uncategorized

The Quick List: What I Believe

by  • 

I have been asked to set out a quick statement of basic beliefs. Here’s a quick, but not exhaustive — as it would not be for anyone’s own — list. There is no meaningful order to the list.

I believe in the radical, dynamic power of free markets to enrich and liberate. Where there is distress or need, private charity (like our food pantry) is a preferred, initial recourse. Where these possibilities, together, temporarily fail, state action may be needed to alleviate suffering and distress.

Our deepest tradition, and the constitution from which it derives, embraces a robust exercise of free speech, assembly, press, and worship. These are the rights of the individual, and attempts to discourage their exercise should be resisted. The state is wrong to restrict these liberties; people are wrong to stifle them in support of social sentiment or imagined politeness. No matter — press on, and write, read, speak, assemble, and pray as you have a right to do, and as no other may dictate.

Public officials, accorded a temporary and limited authority from the people, should be both honest and humble. These traits in public office matter more even than competence.

Exercise of public authority and enforcement of regulations must be fair and impartial. Harsh or selective enforcement is worse than no enforcement at all. Favoritism is the coin of petty corruption. It operates as the social equivalent of graft, and undermines trust.

Government should be impartial between races, faiths, and men and women. Civic organizations do best when they reflect this same principle.

Our schools should maximize opportunities for technology, curriculum, and parental choice, without bias toward local vendors, or entrenched ways of thinking.

I believe in the beneficial influence of our many churches on our community. A serious faith rejects dishonesty, arrogance, prejudice of race and ethnicity, petty self-interest, and the empty embrace of small matters.

We have nearly sunk our small community by too-long ignoring its university, and failing to seize the potential that the campus represents for us. The ceaseless hostility toward it is ignorant and self-destructive.

(For a more comprehensive list of concerns about the status quo, please see my earlier post from May, “Fundamental Challenges Facing Whitewater.”)