Don Jorovsky writes, of City For Neighbors' overdue disclosure form.
 
> But wait!  I forgot!  It's OK when RT's supporters do stuff like that!
> They're the pure reformers who are going to change those terrible
> things down at City Hall, so it's all justified in the name of the
> greater
> good.  Come on.  You can bet that if some SSB supporters did any
> of this stuff, people like Joe would be all over them.

That last part is almost certainly true. However, it should be
remembered that several "RT supporters" - including this one -
criticized City For Neighbors some months back for not fully listing
their membership.

And while Don was right-on to submit this link quickly (pancakes got in
my way this morning, and I didn't see the story last night), he is
jumping to conclusions that no RT supporter feels the late disclosure
form is wrong. I, for one, do.

As to Don's allegation that council members that "A City for Neighbors
didn't want people to see that they were apparently selling high ratings
to Council Members in return for large contributions," this is a
reference to Dore Mead and Jim Niland contributing $500 total to the
group and getting high ratings.

While no quid-pro-quo is proven - council members fund vehicles to
oppose other council members all the time, mostly through direct
contributions not through educational efforts such as this - Don is only
making the same assumptions the "reformers" have made about the
incumbents, so fair enough.

All the more reason reformers need to hold themselves to a higher
standard than the people they are criticizing - and full disclosure and
timely reporting is a vivid illustration. (By the way, the essential
"record" catalogued by City for Neighbors has withstood all challenges
on this forum, in my humble opinion, so give them points for that.)

It's in the public interest to raise ethical standards generally. I see
very few, if any, posts from SSB supporters criticizing facets of the
mayor's contributor list (Ryan Corp. contributions, anyone?) and of
course, Don's post can be read as a told-you-so defense of the
status-quo money-for-something at City Hall.

Hypocrisy is a bad thing, and Don is right to get in a hard, free shot.
Of course, City for Neighbors was founded to get Kathy Thurber and Sandy
Colvin Roy, not elect RT Rybak. While voters should be skeptical of the
purism and infallibility of some of RT's supporters, the bottom line is
which mayoral candidate will improve the ethical situation the most at
City Hall. We can all make our own judgments about that.

Kudos to Steve Brandt for getting this story out, by the way.

David Brauer
King Field - Ward 10




_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to