At 10:09 AM 11/21/2002 -0600, Garwood, Robin wrote:
I think it would elevate this debate slightly if we could get away from a
narrow focus on "criminal misconduct".  In my opinion, "not criminal" is far
too low a standard to which to hold our elected officials.
EY: Exactly. I think it also would be helpful for the city to have tools with which citizens can evaluate their council members. Aggregate reports on meeting attendance (% of meetings attended), and reports on how constituent calls are handled would also be useful to people deciding whether to reelect their city council member.


 A former 5th-ward CM destroying public documents when she leaves
office?  The appearance of corruption.  The already-cited example of city
officials leaving public office to work for companies with business before
the city?  The appearance of corruption.
EY: Not only that, but the legal consequence of Cherryhomes actions with the liquor business on Broadway -- and the ultimate taxpayer consequence of losing a lawsuit should be considered and remembered.


Though I agree with David that we must afford the same legal protections -
the presumption of innocence, specifically - to our elected officials that
we extend to all other citizens, I see the cynicism he (legitimately)
criticizes as a result of the constellation of legal-though-unethical
behaviors we've seen in city hall.  This cynicism is incredibly corrosive to
our local democracy - why should people vote if all their options are
"crooks"?  Paul was right - serving in elected office is "a sacred trust."
Elected officials have a responsibility not only to their constituents and
the city at large, but to the institutions of government themselves.  City
Hall can remain stained with corruption in the public mind long after those
responsible have been cleared out.
EY:
The challenge for the current city council and the mayor is to show that things aren't the same old, same old. The challenge to the DFL is to publically challenge corruption and/or unethical behavior when they encounter it -- because ultimately the problems with DFL office holders in a Democratic/Labor Union dominated city reflects badly both on the DFL and on the Labor Unions.

Should we really allow fundraising in
off-years?
EY:
I think the focus should be on disclosure -- and online disclosure of where the money is coming from. Too often reform means the money finds a new way to help the race -- and those expenditures are harder to monitor and see. Let's work on getting things disclosed. If there was a database of contributors to campaigns -- and this information was linked to information about how the contributors benefited -- for example -- contributions from say Ryan Construction would be linked to information about how much money Ryan Construction got from city projects -- well that could help the taxpayers evaluate what's going on.


Are thinly-veiled campaign letters disguised as "reports from
your CM" really acceptable?
EY:
I'd say yes -- because I want to get communications from my council member -- and I want to hear about what they are accomplishing in city hall. Obviously if those are sent with taxpayer money they should not be soliciting funds for the campaign. Council members also should hold regular (monthly) gatherings with constituents and publish them on this list and on their websites. Gary Schiff and Lisa Goodman both do this. Robert Lilligren has held a couple of these. I'm not sure what other council members do.

We should expect our officials to explore and implement significant
democracy reforms to reduce the power of money and increase the power of
individual voters.  Instant Runoff Voting, a Minneapolis version of the
spectacularly successful Minnesota Political Refund Program, Proportional
Representation, public financing for any candidate with a certain number of
signatures... there are numerous good ideas out there.
EY:
I personally think the current process for holding elections is fine. We have a runnoff and then elections between the two front runners for city council. I think that works pretty well. The problem is what the council members do once they get to the city council.

Unfortunately, the current council and administration are doing very little
on these issues.  If we really want to have a clean, healthy democracy, we
must do more than start an ethics task force and prosecute those who break
the law.  We must hold our officials to the highest possible ethical
standards and constantly reform our democratic systems to encourage such
behavior and discourage the cynicism-breeding misdeeds of the past.

I'll agree to that. They can also strip Biernat of his committee chairmanship. They can also do this with others who violate the spirit of city ethics even if they don't violate criminal law.


Eva Young
Near North
Minneapolis
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

_______________________________________

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

Reply via email to