GreenfieldNOW.com
search all things local
     
Blog Home |  Email Author  |        Welcome to MyCommunityNOW - Blogs Sign in | Join

Senior Viewpoint

Dick Steinberg has resided in the city of Brookfield for 35 years. He served 34 years as municipal judge and has been an attorney for 50 years. He enjoys tennis, golf, biking and creative writing, which includes legal issues, sports, government and people.

He'd love to hear from you. Click here to send him an e-mail.

OPEN GOVERNMENT. YES OR NO

By Richard J. Steinberg
Sunday, Nov 23 2008, 07:03 PM

The failing economy raises the cry loud and clear for more open government, the right of the people to know and to understand.

This right to open government is not limited to the feds but is all inclusive of our own local government.

City hall in the City of Brookfield is a prime example. Official meetings are open to the public for observation and private e-mails and side room discussions are not recorded.

Budgetary items are listed in general categories therefore shielding the nuts and bolts expenses.

Various press releases are issued by various city hall people under the guise of apparent authority to bind the city and it's residents to something the residents know nothing about.

Reckless statements are made by certain public officials that later have to be retracted.

Candidate for Mayor Speaker in 2002, bragged, "I'm an open book", when defending being reprimanded 9 times as a police officer. (see JSOnline, Spivak & Brice).

Yet, there is no open book in our city government.

This is my opinion based on my personal observations for 34 years as a city-wide elected offficial.

Open government. Yes or No?

Comments

Cheri M.   

YES! I agree with you, as I so often do. Here's a funny: I sent letters to each of our Senators and Representatives mentioning the AIG luxury vacations following their receiving bailout money. I asked each of these Senators and Representatives what THEY would do to limit this type of flagrant mis-use of our taxpayer dollars. Guess what I got back? Form-letter drivel which did not address issues of transparency or accountability! Rather than share any definitive action steps, they chose to wax philosophical about the state of the economy in general... facts of which we are well aware and which were not germane to the subject at hand: AIG abuse of OUR $$$. It's as though they did not read my letter! Reminded me of kid with fingers in it's ears defiantly chanting, "I caaaaan't hear youuuuuuuu!" I think it will take more collective voices asking and probing until we are like the commercial: "CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?!"
November 24, 2008 12:48 PM

Santa's Elf   

"Budgetary items are listed in general categories therefore shielding the nuts and bolts expenses." Would the more detailed information not be available under the open records law? Even demolition derby driver/Police Officer/Mayor Jeff is subject to some outside statutory influence. Perhaps what is needed is for a citizens group to come together and created a 992 page list of detailed questions re. the 248 page annual report. That ought to spark some interest in the Finance Committee beyond just passing the buck! I once read a legal tome which asserted that 'He who controls Discovery, controls Litigation'. Seems to me that the same rule ought to apply in this case also. It oughtn't be too difficult for several citizens to come together and file suit in order to obtain financial statements which are both definitive and understandable. Or perhaps that's a great volunteer service to gift to the community. Perhaps we could even subpoena ole Scotty Berg off of his high paying technical job to answer a few weeks of depositions. Law can be fun, Dick, even when you are not nailing speeders!
November 29, 2008 8:55 PM

Leave a Comment

Please Sign In to post comment.

Posts

Your browser must support javascript to use the posts pager. Please enable javascript or return to the home page to page through posts.
Newer Older

Tags

Search the Blogs