At the Aug. 12th council meeting we were presented with a proposal to redirect Etna Road through property owned by a developer into said development land. That in itself is not the point of this post. While there are certainly concerns and opinions, pro and con, this post has more to do with the effects ‘team’ politics has in Whitehall and on council. That which, in my opinion, were on display at Tuesday night’s meeting, seen here from 0:05:16 to 1:23:00:
https://whitehalloh.portal.civicclerk.com/event/18/media
At that meeting, the majority of the questions which played devil’s advocate for the people were asked primarily by myself and Councilman Larry Morrison. I believed this was a crucial time for the people’s representatives to ask questions and share concerns on behalf of the people. To really get at the nitty gritty of the situation which has the possibility of costing taxpayers around 1.1 million dollars. Unfortunately, that opportunity (particularly in light of applying for the grant for this having to be passed in one week), I thought, was fairly squandered by a lot of propping up and hard sell for this project from some of those on the dais, instead of any greater concern and questioning the city redirecting an actual street into a developer’s property with YOUR money deserved.
You’re telling me we’re going to have to pay X amount of taxpayer dollars to reposition a street through and into a developer’s property which has also been the focus of a contentious public fight for nearly two years? Call me crazy but I thought that worthy of more deeply, thorough questioning, particularly given that its going to cost X amount of money which the city pulled from taxpayer’s wallets. That alone is worthy of one’s consideration.
This is not to say that councilors can’t do anything as they wish but, the pattern where some always play devil’s advocate for Administration, to me, is concerning.

This concern of mine then relates to a larger perspective in how politics plays a certain troublesome role in Whitehall government and in particular with the Legislative branch. To wit: the Executive branch (the Administration) wants something that will affect a neighborhood and cost taxpayers money. Some in the Legislative branch, citizen representatives, in my view, are indebted in various ways to the Executive branch which then can compromise their ability to make independent decisions needed of them, apart from the Executive branch, that which their role as your representative requires of them. It has the possibility then to become create a betrayal of that contract between citizens and the person running for office who claims they’ll represent you.
Here then are three examples of that which concern me and of which my views derive:

There is also this:

While it is everyone’s fault on Council, including myself, ‘team’ players and the Council President(!) for not realizing we had to fill the Ward 4 seat by 30 days, it opened it up for appointment by the mayor. Councilor Brown owes his appointment then, not to a group of people but to only one person, the mayor, who is part of a separate branch. That which creates indebtedness (or the appearance of such) implied by actions taken by one’s benefactor (s).
As well, there is the above video of an ill-timed, ill-presented ‘meet and greet’ for the freshly appointed councilor hosted by the mayor, who’s promotion of Mr. Brown’s greatness before he’s even taken any time to prove it, is self-serving.
Also from Google AI: “Preventing Ethical Lapses: Focusing on appearances can help prevent situations where an actual conflict might arise in the future. By identifying and addressing potential issues early, officials can take steps to avoid situations that could compromise their integrity”.*

So then, here is the rub…(which includes endlessly unabashed promotion of Administrative activities and proposals): when you are politically indebted, on whatever level and in whatever way, it takes away from your ability to govern independently for those you’re supposed to be serving. When decisions and actions are then taken with that indebtedness underneath, whatever one does, whether truly made with indebtedness to the separate branch of government or not, because one failed to let the ethical principles that inform our precious government be their guidance in matters of the people, they cannot be trusted. Even if an official believes they can be impartial, the appearance of a conflict can still raise concerns about whether decisions are being made solely on the merits and in the best interest of the public. Are they doing this because they actually believe in what they’re saying or is it simply to support the ‘team’ leader, the political benefactor? Because someone didn’t adhere to principles that guide the public trust…they then have lost it…and rightly so (as we are seeing from the public now of which, ironically, makes the jobs for those in Whitehall’s government that much harder).
I maintain that if one is going to get into public service, there are certain guiding principles that, if one is dedicated to the people and not themselves, should rightly adhere to… FOR the people, FOR Whitehall, FOR America. When they don’t, we then see the inevitable erosion of the public trust and its systems and with it, America, as we are seeing in real time today. Filled with people who chose self and vested interests over the people and our system of government. Also from Google AI, (I can’t say it any better than this): “The success of government depends heavily on public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of its officials. If the public perceives that an official’s judgment is influenced by personal interests, it can erode trust and lead to cynicism about the fairness and effectiveness of government decisions.”
Ten years ago, I wrote a piece on this subject which is pretty spot on. I still love this quote from it:
“…public office is a public trust. Colleen Lewis says it well in an article she wrote for the website, ‘The Conversation’.  She wrote, “When we entrust people with power over our lives, that power should be exercised in our interests; that obligation must always prevail over the interests of the people given the power… It follows that when (an elected official) is making a decision and the common good of the people requires one decision, but his or her personal or political loyalties and future require a different decision, he or she must always give priority to the common good.” In other words, ones own loyalties and gain must take a backseat to that of the public’s interests and gains.”
For the full blogpost, click here:
https://whitehallwatchblog.com/2015/07/04/why-ethics-in-public-office-matter/

The other thing about this pernicious problem for our government, and therefore our nation and community, is this: Sometimes, proposals which wind their way through your government, have varying levels of merit. Sometimes they might be great, sometimes good, sometimes six of one/half dozen of another, sometimes they can seem good but on closer inspection, stink like rotting fish, or, they’re outright bad. It is unbiased, independent critical thinking then which is the vital KEY to figuring out which is which, rightly rooting out then good from bad, wheat from the chaff. When those proper qualities are absent or being ignored; clouded with bias or indebtedness for benefactors, and particularly when there is a majority conflict in the legislative branch, it becomes a clear and present danger to the rightful path and operation of YOUR city, YOUR community and its success or failure. This issue which is also exacerbated by people just walking through doors into office, thus serving up to our community people who may not be the best candidates for you, for your city. That process which is abetted by several components (that topic for another time).

So you’ve got this grouping of efforts which create this situation which can grease the forward movements of bad proposals (as we’ve seen with various projects/issues in our community in the last several years). It is this process then that can/does and is having the ability to harm our community; black/brown/white/homeowner/renter/Christian/Muslim/Jew/gay/straight/man/woman, we’re all affected, we all pay a price for this decades old political ‘system’ of Whitehall government. To be made aware of it is to have the knowledge to begin to fight it. In my years-long efforts to awaken Whitehall’s citizens to this threat to our community, as this post furthers, my goal’s ultimate benefit has been for my hometown and neighbors. That which makes all this fight, all this effort supremely worthwhile.

Thank you for your time.

*While I make this claim about ‘indebtedness’ to the Executive branch, I DO give Councilor Brown some level of understanding due to his age, lack of understanding/consideration of ethics regarding office holders and their relationships, etc.
That same consideration which I do not give to the more elder of the ‘team’ players, clearly seen in the video, who I believe snatched him into their enthusiastic clutches for their own gains. These elders who should have known better but whose self-interest in ‘team’ politics outweighed any commitment to the purity and importance of The Public Trust and the systems of our great country’s government which rely on and are vitally served by dedication to that trust.