MJS Edit on Holloway
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorializes on the Holloway saga Today.
An excerpt:
The serious problems with Holloway's properties aside, his refusal to accept a court summons and failure to appear in court hardly qualify as acceptable behavior for any elected official, much less one in his position. Holloway seems to act as if he doesn't have to answer to anyone but himself.
This is illustrated in his repeated attempts to punish supervisors who don't agree with him and his preoccupation with the ethics prosecution, prompting some County Board members to ask him to either step down or possibly face another election for chairman.
Holloway on Monday gave his critics even more ammunition by telling a Journal Sentinel reporter he might try to block funds for the Ethics Board to pressure the body to drop some of its charges against him. Not only would that have been a desperate measure but possibly illegal.
The section of state law that deals with misconduct in public office declares that it is a felony for a public officer or employee to, among other things, do anything "with intent to obtain a dishonest advantage" for himself. It seems that blocking funding for an investigation of yourself arguably qualifies as "dishonest advantage."
On Tuesday, Holloway reversed course and sent a letter to the Ethics Board and the Personnel Review Board saying he would not try to block, or even vote on, any measure to continue funding for the ethics prosecution.
In the letter, Holloway said the Journal Sentinel story was false. We believe Holloway said what he said and his letter Tuesday was nothing short of political backpedaling by a public official who obviously realized he had overstepped his bounds.
Supervisor John Weishan Jr., one of the board members who has pushed for Holloway to step down as chairman until the ethics complaint is resolved, said the public deserves the "full truth" behind the alleged improprieties. Weishan is right; the only way that truth will come out is if the investigation continues.
Holloway has resisted appeals for him to step aside temporarily as chairman. The chance supervisors unhappy with Holloway will be able to legally force another election was complicated Wednesday when the state attorney general's office said it will not, as promised, provide a formal opinion on the legality of the move to replace Holloway.
That puts the matter back in the lap of the County Board, especially the Holloway supporters, who now must ask themselves if they are truly prepared to have him continue as their leader. Again, Holloway should spare them the effort and step aside as chairman.
Yes, he should. But he most likely won't.
So hold a vote.
Lay the cards on the table.
4 Comments:
2/23/2006
Allegations of Racism Abound At County Board
By Robert Miranda
Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager will not be giving a formal opinion on whether a mutinous group of supervisors have the legal ability to oust Supervisor Lee Holloway from his position as chairman of the Milwaukee County Board.
Even with all the legal issues being debated, one thing is pretty clear: race is indeed a factor in this campaign to oust Milwaukee County's first African-American county board chairman.
Sure, some supervisors can bellow about the fact that Holloway was elected by a super-majority to become county board chairman; nonetheless, it still does not explain the underbelly reason why they feel Holloway has to be removed now. Some say he failed to provide leadership. Others say his work is being affected by the ethics case pending against him. No matter the reasons, the fact remains: Holloway has the right to defend himself from these non-criminal accusations.
When Mark Belling slurred Milwaukee’s Hispanic community, the county board was asked to vote on a matter that would have placed his employer (Clear Channel) in an unfavorable position contractually with the county. Some of the same anti-Holloway supervisors voted to support Belling and his employer because they were concerned that “FREE SPEECH” would be negatively affected if they voted against him.
Today, Lee Holloway, a Black man, is trying to defend himself from allegations presented by the ethics board, and some of the 10 mutiny leaders who voted for Belling’s right to “FREE SPEECH” are now standing against Holloway’s right to DUE PROCESS.
Is this another example of the county board’s inconsistency, or is it a stark example of racism?
Supervisor Tony Clark expressed dismay at the manner in which the mutinous group of supervisors proceeded to pass around a letter seeking to remove Holloway via a special election with a simple majority rule. “No one asked me anything nor did anyone show me a letter,” said Clark.
Clark was not the only person of color that did not get approached by the all-white group of supervisors seeking to remove Holloway.
Even the one Latina on the county board, Peggy West, wasn’t approached and asked her opinion or asked to join the effort.
What is truly interesting is that Supervisor Marina Dimitrijevic, a white supervisor, wasn’t shown the letter also.
It is, however, noted by many on the board that Dimitrijevic tends to be sympathetic to the issues that affect Black and Latino communities. She’s referred to as the “minority sympathizer” on the board. So, it makes sense that whoever was passing around the infamous “let’s get Holloway letter” would not have provided her with details of the coup attempt.
It is hard not to ignore the issue of race in this matter. The history of the Milwaukee County Board makes it impossible for many leaders of color to not be suspicious of the actions of the mutinous group of supervisors.
Supervisor James G. White hits the nail right on the head when he says, “History supports us when we point out examples of double standard. When it comes to matters affecting Black people, white supervisors have always employed the extremes against us. But when it’s a matter that affects an institution that is majority white, or a white individual, these extremes are rarely applied.”
White points to the Milwaukee Public Museum as a contrast to what happened with the Opportunities Industrialization Center of Greater Milwaukee. He asserts that when the Milwaukee Career Youth Development agency was facing fiscal issues, Jeannetta Robinson, CYD's executive director, was forced to almost beg for her agency’s life. Robinson experienced extreme measures of accountability pursued by the majority of the white supervisors.
Indeed, the fiscal issues afflicting OIC and CYD pale when compared to the monstrous financial condition the Milwaukee Public Museum is putting taxpayers through.
Yet the extreme actions that these two Black agencies had to go through mirror nothing like the delicate manner in which the Milwaukee Public Museum is dealt with.
Is it any wonder why Milwaukee’s Black leaders on the Milwaukee County Board have raised the issue of racism? Hmm…
-- Miranda is a national award winning columnist, Latino community activist and Editor-in-Chief of the Milwaukee Spanish Journal.
Thanks Robert.
I guess this is one way for people to try to read your stuff.
I will refute your column in a bit. Maybe during my lunch break.
Thanks for readin'!
NOW we know who the vitriolic anonymous poster has been on here.
Explains a lot.
We've proven that Miranda works for the county board. cool.
Post a Comment
<< Home