Tamir Nolley wrote: > Ironically, I see Joe Biernat as a victim of such > enforcement. In some ways he contributed to that > environment, but the tacticts of Sean Boylan, and > Ashcroft's justice department in general, I think, are > disgusting, at one point even threateing to harass > Biernat's son, and the cryptic statement (by Byolan) > that Beirnat was a small fish caught up in something > much larger. What is larger? What does George W. want > with our city? > > Why isn't this aspect of the situation getting more > scrutiny? What is the real interest of the federal > government in trying to micromanage the Third Ward. > One more thing. Valdis, If you're reading, is it true > that you're running as a Republican this time? How do > you feel about the state or federal government's > interests here. (don't get me wrong, I like Valdis > quite a bit, I've just heard this through the grape > vine, and as much as I like him, I can't support a > Republican while GW is president, given the disaster > he is for civil liberties. If Valdis is independent, > different story.) > > Why isn't this blatant abuse by law enforcment in this > case getting more scrutiny, and (now that I live in > the Third Ward, and my son goes to school in the ward) > what are all of your positions on law enforcement > issues?
Call me old fashion, but I don't think that it's appropriate for public officials to accept personal gifts from constituents regardless if they come as cash in envelopes or as free services. We're not talking coffee and donuts here or helping a resident with their paperwork. Biernat accepted thousands of dollars of free plumbing work and then lied to the FBI to try and cover his actions. As far as I'm concerned those should have been sufficient reasons for him to resign. When I vote for a council member I do so with the expectation that they will run the city government effectively, not use their office to enrich themselves (If 60k isn't a high enough salary go into plumbing, it appears to pay a lot more). According to his resignation Mr. Biernat seems to think that there's nothing improper with his actions. I am fearful that this is because his behavior simply reflects business as usual in city hall (another reason the DFL should have forced him to resign earlier). Should the Federal government be vigilant about local corruption and patronage? As long as it is enforced equally I believe that they should. It's not as though they spent millions of dollars hounding Biernat for years until they finally caught him having sexual relations with an office worker. Michael Atherton Prospect Park PS: This is a great opportunity for the Greens. If they have become more politically savvy they'll realize that they need to pore everything they've got locally into this election to maintain whatever momentum that they have from the last city election. And it's also an opportunity for the Republicans to voice real concerns about the state of city government. David Brauer wrote: >Can we assume low turnout in a primary (which a special election on Dec. >30 seems like to produce) favors the DFL? No. If the Greens are active a low turnout would favor them. Which is why they need to get moving....NOW! _______________________________________ 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
