Mr. Woods -
In some ways we are in heated agreement. I am all for citizens being
involved in public debate. I have worked for that. I have supported that.
I believe it in it. But it is a two way street. If citizens want to be
involved in debate, they also have a responsibility to become educated on
the issues.
This discussion has been rife with out and out fallacies about the role of a
consulting financial advisor, about the role of the Finance Officer at the
City of Minneapolis, and about the processes used to hire department heads
at the City of Minneapolis. Citizens who want to criticize process need to
hold up their end of the deal and educate themselves before making unfounded
statements. That is the social contract that we all hold to as citizens.
Carol Becker
Longfellow
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: Finance Director
> 2) What purpose would it serve? Monday-morning
> > quarterbacking by people who didn't sit through the interviews, didn't
> > review the qualifications of the individuals, and who don't know the
> > duties
> > of the job? So what if the guy, in his 19 years of public finance work,
> > worked on some stadiums. I bet there isn't a single credible candidate
> > who
> > wouldn't have something in their background that someone would object
to.
> > The question is whether the person has the skills to do the job.
> >
> > And Kathy O'Brien is the most capable administrator I have met in my
> > entire
> > career in public service. And I have met a lot.
> >
> I feel a need to respond to this. Like Mr. Connolly, I feel a deep
> cynicism about the way that the city government functions. I also am
> unhappy about the fact that various levels of government keep on trying to
> shove another stadium down the throats of the citizens of Minneapolis and
> in general try to construct it as a place of pleasure for non-residents.
> But more significantly, I'm a little disturbed by some of the implications
> of Mrs. Becker's positions. There may be a legitimate position to say
that
> Mr. Born is a decent fellow and that Kathy O'Brien is a very good
> administrator. One can even say that the critiques are wrong... perhaps
> they are. But there seems to be something going beyond that in the
> language concerning 'monday morning quarterbacks' et al. that seems to be
> saying that the critics should be minding our own business and letting the
> administrators run things. I have to disagree with that. We have the
> right and duty to criticize those making decisions for us because we are
> citizens (I apologise for the self-aggrandizing, civics lesson feel of
this
> statement.) and we (at least should) live in a city that decisions are
made
> on a basis that we are the ultimate arbiters of those decisions. To put
it
> bluntly, Minneapolis should be a city made up of its citizens not its
> administrators. In the years of activism, I've been repeatedly told that I
> can't have an opinion in any number of subjects on the premise that I am
> not an 'expert' on the subject. Who precisely are these 'expert'
guardians
> who act without interests except those that are of the general good that
> are not to be questioned? I think it is perfectly reasonable to be
> suspicious of a council that has repeatedly tried to sell different
> versions of a stadium to a hostile public. I also think it is perfectly
> reasonable to be suspicious of the fact that they hired an individual for
> Finance Officer that is highly involved in stadium politics. Perhaps
these
> issues will play out to naught, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a
> reason to be wary.
>
> Robert Wood a somewhat rambling anti-authoritarian marxist/ green party
> member.... St. Paul resident who works at and attends the university of
> minnesota
>
>
>
