The secret life of the chair-and-mayor
July 1st, 2008 at 10:15am Linda Grist Cunningham
First some conflict of interest disclaimers: (1) my boss is plugged into the Rockfordward! Leadership Council, the RAEDC and the mayor’s education task force. He shares none of his insider information with me or News Tower journalists, nor with the editorial board. He does not know I am writing this and he may disagree; (2) I don’t speak for the editorial board. The board’s majority will weigh in later; (3) I am not opposed to an appointed school board, and have voted “yes” on it several times when it came before the editorial board. There are pros and cons worthy of exploration and under some circumstances, I might be happy with an appointed board; and (4) nothing makes me unhappier as a journalist than elected officials who think doing the public’s business in private is OK.
So, with those on the table: What in the name of heaven were Rockford Mayor Larry Morrissey and Winnebago County Board Chairman Scott Christensen thinking when they SECRETLY proposed studying taking over the Rockford District 205 board and appointing its members?
OK, it wasn’t so secret since that proposal was submitted in writing with a date of June 13 to a whole bunch of community leaders and business people who are part of Rockforward! and the RAEDC, and assorted other acronyms and organizations who meet privately to decide what the rest of us will know and how our community will grow. But it was not done publicly and it was done with the expectation that all those folks would keep it to themselves.
How naive of the mayor-and-chair to not realize someone would leak the darn thing to us. And they did. And we made calls and the mayor’s staff went into “please don’t run this until we can have a press conference and if you do you will jeopardize its chances and upset people” mode.
We ran it. I never even considered not doing so. The mayor-and-chair want an appointed school board like Chicago, then they ought to stand up there and say so in a public meeting. Do that FIRST, THEN you can send your proposal to Rockfordward! seeking $50,000 in research funding.
The mayor-and-chair like these quasi-public-private organizations because they can get public figures, elected officials, decision makers and players to the same table without having an open public meeting. It started with the old Council of 100 and organizations like the Convention and Visitors Bureau and is morphing nicely with RAEDC and its Rockforward! Leadership Council.
Now, the mayor-and-chair, instead of doing the public’s school business in public at the county board meetings and the city council meetings are doing them at a Rockforward! meeting. Not so good, guys.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
11 Comments Add your own
1. aConcernedCitizen | July 1st, 2008 at 11:12 am
Transparency in government is fundamental to the way American Democracy is supposed to work.
Looks like someone took a hint from Richard Nixon’s playbook.
Good thing it worked so well for him.
2. Linda Grist Cunningham | July 1st, 2008 at 11:58 am
Elected officials always want transparency when they are seeking election. The day after? They realize just how hard it is to get things accomplished when everyone is looking on. So, rather than work hard at making transparency work, they almost always fall back on the old saw: We need to do all this privately so we don’t upset people before hand…..
3. FrankyG | July 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
You are right on. This Rockforward and the RAEDC are a sham.
The “NEW” way to the “OLD good’ol boy’s way of doing things.
We have a “BRAT and Bully Mayor and Administration that I believe thinks he is Mayor Daley.
He wants to run Rockford with an iron fist and a “my way or the highway” attitude.
He is an error. I am very proud of the stand and guts Ms Linda.
This is not “LEADERSHIP” or “Excellence”.
He is not smarter than everyone else and his ideas aren’t the best this city has to offer.
If they were….he / they wouldn’t be hiding and cloaked in secret
Very PROUD of you Linda and thank you!
Ps your Boss should know better than to be a part or associated with these groups.
He should be disconnected and independent. Full disclosure…..
He has causing a Great disservice to the RRStar(and all it stands for) and
It’s Readers for which it owes it loyalty first and foremost.
He should remove himself immediately from the organization(s).
4. the.dude.abides | July 1st, 2008 at 12:59 pm
http://www.rockfordil.com/membership/rockforward/
Why aren’t they using the ($50,000) Rockford logo? You know? “Real, Original?”
Here: I’ve got an idea for Rockford — put in some bike lanes on sub-major arteries.
Where’s my $50k?
5. Linda Grist Cunningham | July 1st, 2008 at 2:06 pm
FrankyG: I do appreciate your enthusiasm, though I do want to clarify something: I don’t like the not-for-public organizational structures, but I’m a fan of RAEDC and what it is both trying to accomplish and actually getting done. These folks are working hard and it’s easy to take shots but they are out there doing it. I want them to do it in public. Ditto with the mayor. I don’t share your distaste; indeed, for the most part I agree with and support his plans and dreams. Again, what I don’t like is the not-for-public approaches. Get ‘em all out in the open and then let’s debate the merits.
DA: LOL. If I had $50,000, I’d share.
Keep those comments coming.
6. butch north | July 1st, 2008 at 3:14 pm
This is just dear old LARRY trying to keep up with his greed for power. Why does lawyers always think they are the only ones that can make decisions. What has the city council said, ABOUT ANY OF THIS? nothing! Why is the city council so scared of the mayor?The wimps. Well, fortunately the mayor has to run for re election. Good luck mayor. you can\\\’t buy my vote.
7. Pundit | July 1st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
I agree with your analysis of the quasi-public-private organizations. Also, if you look at the Rockford Global Alliance, it really is a lobbying group for the mayor’s causes and not necessarily in the best interest of Rockford. They don’t have to abide by the the Freedom of Information Act or Open Meetings Act. The mayor is the absolute power and can kick people off the board if he doesn’t agree with them or their votes. And when things go wrong, who is held accountable?
Most of the mayor’s actions have been to undercut the city council and now the Rockford School Board.
Regarding the city council, the previous post is correct. This group of officials don’t act like legislators. During officers comments at the city council meeting they talk more about what events they have attended rather than doing the business of the people. That is why they are so easy for the mayor to walk all over them.
The mayor and city council need to focus on the ever increasing crime rate in this city. It is out of control and has increased since his administration has taken over. He has to work with people but he only wants to work with people he can bully.
Regarding your boss, how can he be objective when he has become part of Morrissey’s Dream Team?
8. Linda Grist Cunningham | July 1st, 2008 at 6:16 pm
Yep, Pundit, the Global Alliance plan also concerns me because of its public-private governance structure. It’s definitely on my radar but I didn’t want to clutter the other issue by trying to explain the Global Alliance, too.
As for my boss and his objectivity: Newspaper publishers historically have been — and good ones are — deeply and broadly involved in the community. Editors and other journalists have more restrictions on them than are on publishers and other employees at the News Tower. I’m glad he is so deeply connected; it’s important to the community and to the newspaper. And, I am especially glad he doesn’t use his connections inappropriately. In short, I trust and respect my boss and his credibility.
9. Veritas | July 3rd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
I don’t disagree at all that important activities which affect the community should be done with as much public exposure and involvement as possible—though anyone with any experience knows this is sometimes impractical (or even unwise) in early planning stages while ideas are being articulated into something presentable for community reaction.
However, one thing that bugs me is the automatic presumption by some in the media that groups such as business leaders in the leadership council have some evil, money-or-power-grubbing conspiracy in mind that they want to cloak in secrecy until it can be sprung onto a naive public who quakes in the shadow of the cartel’s power.
Come on—most of these leaders are trying to accomplish the same goal as everyone else, including the Register Star: make this a nicer place to live and work for their families, neighbors and employees. Are they 100% successful or always experts in managing the process? Of course not, since it appears they really are human. Perhaps in addition to their personal motives as residents they have a complementary business incentive. The funds being invested in these community projects are, afterall, private money. What’s wrong with that in a market-based society?
Let’s turn the tables a bit and ask this question of the newspaper’s free-from-bias-and-personal-motive editorial leadership: “Will you open to the public every internal editorial position and story planning meeting so we can see if your decisions are being influenced by a political agenda or a desire to shape public opinion—or heavens—maybe even a goal of selling more newspapers or ads?” Wait—nix on that last point. I forgot that journalism is always separated from the dirty world of commerce.
I will look forward to seeing the editorial meeting schedule and location in Sunday’s paper.
10. Linda Grist Cunningham | July 5th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Veritas: You make the assumption that our editorial board meetings are some secret society. Not so much. We meet every Monday and Thursday at 11 a.m., usually for about an hour. We have had at least one, and usually two, community members on the board at all times for two decades (All members names are published every day on the editorial page.) Community members join us at our invitation and over the years we have welcomed folks like Ted Biondo and Henrietta Dotson-Williams. There have been young ones, older ones, left- and right-ones. Each serves about a year, and each gets the same one-vote as newspaper members. We have often welcomed readers in just to attend a board meeting and see what it’s like. Call ahead to make sure we are actually meeting. The board’s majority decides the position and we don’t have a secret ballot. We are exploring video cam posts of our meetings as well.
But, even if we weren’t that open, the fact is pretty simple: We are a private business and we are not bound by the Open Public Meetings Act. We are not elected officials and are not required by law to do our business in public. We choose to do so because it is the right thing to do.
Oh, an one more point: Editorial boards are ALL about opinion. That’s what they are; we’re not supposed to be neutral nor objective. Factual, yes. But nothing about an editorial board is about representing all sides.
11. Veritas | July 7th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Linda: I will wholeheartedly grant the newspaper the right to not be bound by the open meetings act by virtue of being a private organization, as long as you grant the same to the other private entities mentioned in your original post–the RAEDC and visitors bureau, or for that matter, any of many other non-profits like United Way, Community Foundation, Janet Wattles, Abilities Center, etc. As far as I know, they all try to be as transparent as is practical.
Yes…you will probably bring up the they-use-our-tax-dollars thing. Perhaps they do to varying degrees, but you could probably find some small way in which even the Register Star benefits from public funds. A specious argument all the way around. They are private organizations and not covered by the sunshine laws, period.
And just as with your editorial board, doesn’t a private group like the leadership council have the right to be ALL about opinion as well? They put their own money behind their collective mouths and stated priorities that are intended to improve the community. While the interests represented there are likely pretty diverse, why should they be held to a “representing all sides” test any more than the editorial board?
If you’ve got a gripe about the mayor/chair going to this group for support, then stick with that complaint rather than suggesting something nefarious and conspiratorial on the part of the leadership council. They only listened to political leaders and expressed support, so don’t get hung up on process and lose sight that they are probably a bunch of good folks wanting to put resources behind things important to the community.
Incidentally, my recommendation for openness at the paper wasn’t only related to the editorial board, but also to the ongoing internal editorial planning meetings that strategize topic coverage, story angles, positions and desired outcomes. That, not the editorial board meetings, is where the real work happens that influences public opinion.
And I will look forward to viewing the editorial board meetings on the web…great idea.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed