Categories

Archive for the ‘Corruption’ Category

According to the Hill’s Bob Kusack, Democrats think Sen. Reid is “curmudgeonly.”

They like the fact that he says things they wish they could say. That’s proof that Democrats are totally out of touch with America. This article highlights just how evil Sen. Reid and the Democrats are:

While many have condemned the strong-arming and pseudo-military tactics of the Bureau of Labor Management in its standoff with Cliven Bundy, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, reserved his criticism for the Bundy family and their many supporters — which he labelled domestic terrorists.

That’s despicable. Sen. Reid should be thrown out of the Senate on a unanimous vote. The fact that Democrats think Sen. Reid is “effective” shows that they don’t treat character as an essential trait for leadership positions. What’s interesting about Andy McCarthy’s article is that Democrats don’t think highly about the rule of law, either:

The underlying assumption of our belief in the rule of law is that we are talking about law in the American tradition: provisions that obligate everyone equally and that are enforced dispassionately by a chief executive who takes seriously the constitutional duty to execute the laws faithfully. The rule of law is not the whim of a man who himself serially violates the laws he finds inconvenient and who, under a distortion of the “prosecutorial discretion” doctrine, gives a pass to his favored constituencies while punishing his opposition. The rule of law is the orderly foundation of our free society; when it devolves into a vexatious process by which ideologues wielding power undertake to tame those whose activities they disfavor, it is not the rule of law anymore.

The Obama administration doesn’t believe in the rule of law being applied equally and dispassionately. The Obama administration believes in looking the other way when their friends violate the law. This administration only believes in enforcing laws if it punishes their political enemies;

The legitimacy of law and our commitment to uphold it hinge on our sense that the law and its execution are just. As John Hinderaker points out, concerns about the desert tortoise—the predicate for taking lawful action against Nevada ranchers under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)—turn out to be pretextual. The ideologues who run the government only want to enforce the ESA against a disfavored class, the ranchers. If you’re a well-connected Democrat who needs similar land for a solar project, the Obama administration will not only refrain from enforcing the ESA against you; it will transport the tortoises to the ranchers’ location in order to manufacture a better pretext for using the law to harass the ranchers.

Sen. Reid thinks it’s right to use his overly-exalted position to hurt the Bundys and to help his parasite of a son, Rory, make a quick buck. That’s what parasites do.

When law becomes a politicized weapon rather than a reflection of society’s shared principles, one can no longer expect it to be revered in a manner befitting “political religion.” And when the officials trusted to execute law faithfully violate laws regularly, they lose their presumption of legitimacy. Much of the public is not going to see the Feds versus Bundy as the Law versus the Outlaw; we are more apt to see it as the Bully versus the Small Fry.

We’re most likely to see Sen. Reid as lacking the character to be a leader. Even if Democrats are ok with him as a leader, the American people shouldn’t accept him as a leader.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Recently, I’ve written about a corrupt government agency that’s titled the IRRRB, aka the Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation Board. In this post, I wrote about something that the IRRRB funded:

It was a company with direct ties and allegiance to the Democratic Party. After Republican President Richard Nixon’s resignation over the Watergate scandal the business created an “innovative small donor fundraising program called the Dollars for Democrats program,” according to the Meyer Teleservices website.

This afternoon, I wrote this post to talk about how the IRRRB resurrected that program with a little twist:

EVELETH, Minn.— Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board (IRRRB) Commissioner Tony Sertich today announced that New Partners Consultants, Inc. will operate a call center for its customers at Progress Park in Eveleth. The company is finalizing plans to lease the space that formerly housed Meyer Associates, Inc. New Partners will utilize some equipment from the Meyer operation, which is currently under IRRRB’s ownership.

The Minnesota offices of Dollars for Democrats went bankrupt a few weeks ago, leaving Minnesota taxpayers on the hook for $650,000 in unpaid loans from the IRRRB. What’s disgusting beyond the stupidity of making $650,000 worth of loans to a company on the verge of bankruptcy is that taxpayers were paying for a political operation.

That shouldn’t happen. Ever. Still, it’s happened twice in the past couple months. Government, whether it’s state or federal government, shouldn’t make loans or give grants to political operations. Period. If a political party wants to open a call center or coordination center, they should do it with their own money. Taxpayers shouldn’t finance political operations.

Here’s the IRRRB’s mission statement:

Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation Board (IRRRB) is a State of Minnesota development agency located in Eveleth, Minnesota. IRRRB’s mission is to promote and invest in business, community and workforce development for the betterment of northeastern Minnesota.

IRRRB provides vital funding, including low or no interest loans, grants and loan guarantees for businesses relocating or expanding in the region. Additionally, a variety of grants are available to local units of government, education institutions, and nonprofits that promote workforce development and sustainable communities.

How can the IRRRB or New Partners say that getting equipment from a bankrupt company is investing businesses, communities or workforce development?

Another thing that’s disgusting is New Partners is an operation for national Democrats. Here’s part of New Partners’ leadership team:

Paul Tewes
In 2007, Paul began the Obama for America campaign as State Director for the Iowa caucuses. For nearly a year, Paul and his team built the largest grassroots organization in caucus history. The year culminated with an Obama win in January 2008, a win that launched his historical campaign. Paul was also instrumental in putting together the blueprint for President Obama’s organizational efforts in the General Election.

Tom McMahon
From 2005-2009, McMahon served as Executive Director of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). There he was one of the principal architects of the ground-breaking “50 state strategy” that transformed and modernized the Democratic Party resulting in historic electoral gains in both 2006 and 2008 at the state, local and federal levels and laying the groundwork for President Obama’s historic win in 2008.

Cara Morris Stern
From 2000-2004, Cara served as a spokesperson for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. During her tenure at the DSCC, Cara worked with national political reporters to help frame the nation’s most visible and competitive Senate campaigns as well as develop message for donor communications.

The IRRRB, led by former DFL House Majority Leader Tony Sertich, just provided seed money and equipment to a political organization whose goal is to elect Democrats. Minnesota taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for any political operation from any political party. Period.

That’s before talking about whether the business model makes sense. (It doesn’t.) This is what politically motivated crony capitalism looks like. Inevitably, crony capitalism is corrupt, which this operation certainly is.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

The Iron Range branch office of the DFL, aka the IRRRB, just announced that it’s spending taxpayers’ money on a bankrupt business venture:

EVELETH, Minn.— Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board (IRRRB) Commissioner Tony Sertich today announced that New Partners Consultants, Inc. will operate a call center for its customers at Progress Park in Eveleth. The company is finalizing plans to lease the space that formerly housed Meyer Associates, Inc. New Partners will utilize some equipment from the Meyer operation, which is currently under IRRRB’s ownership. Staffing will begin as soon as all agreements are in place, possibly as early as next week.

“We are pleased to have played a role in facilitating the reopening of the center,” said Sertich. “This project will result in new job opportunities, particularly for those displaced by the Meyer closing.”

Sertich recognized Gilbert native Jerry Samargia of New Partners, stating, “I am thankful to Jerry for investing in the center and the people of the Iron Range.”

He also praised Virginia Eveleth Economic Development Authority representatives and Gary Owen, former owner of Meyer, for putting a deal together in such a short time.

New Partners isn’t well-known. I think it’s time it got some notoriety. Here’s what New Partners is in their own words:

New Partners is more than just a new firm with new people and new ideas. We also represent a new way of doing business. Whether the goal is to win an election, affect reputation, organize an advocacy campaign, raise money, or build a movement, our extensive expertise and groundbreaking strategies will get results.

We are all operating in a new environment based on a fundamental shift in how we organize, how we communicate and how we advocate. From the campaign that defeated President Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security, and implementing Governor Howard Dean’s landmark 50 State Strategy, to spearheading an innovative and successful development effort for the One Campaign, and the unprecedented Iowa caucus campaign that led to President Obama’s breakthrough victory, the team at New Partners has been at the epicenter of that shift.

What we have learned from our experience is that no two issues, organizations or campaigns are the same. Each requires a unique approach based on new ideas and new strategies that will lead to new results.

That means that the IRRRB is spending taxpayers’ money on a company committed to electing Democrats. The list of New Partners’ leadership reads like a who’s who from the Obama campaign.

If the Democratic Party want to put an organization together, that’s their right. It’s just that this type of operation shouldn’t be paid for by taxpayers. And there’s no question it’s being funded by taxpayers. That’s the IRRRB’s way. The IRRRB hasn’t met a project benefitting the Democratic Party that they didn’t like.

The DNC should finance this operation. Minnesota taxpayers shouldn’t finance it. Having taxpayers finance the DNC’s operations is the definition of crony capitalism meeting single party government. That’s the definition of corruption.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

After watching this video, it’s apparent that Gov. Dayton is attempting to hide something from Minnesotans:

This article has more than a whiff of desparation to it.

Gov. Mark Dayton vowed Tuesday not to cooperate with a legislative panel that wants to question top officials in his administration about technical problems that marred the Oct. 1 launch of MNsure, the state’s health insurance exchange.

If Gov. Dayton doesn’t change his attitude ASAP, this will hurt him. Here’s why:

Legislative Auditor James Nobles, who is conducting a review of MNsure, said Todd-Malmlov has so far declined to discuss her stewardship of the agency. Nobles said he will take the unusual step of issuing a subpoena and using the courts to compel her testimony if she does not come in voluntarily for an interview.

“We think there are a lot of questions that need to be answered in a thorough and objective way,” Nobles said. “We want to hear her perspective. … She was at center stage, so to speak, and knows more than probably anybody.”

Mr. Nobles has subpoena power, meaning his questions will get answered. If that means compelling Tina Smith’s and Lucinda Jesson’s testimony, then that’s what he’ll do. Gov. Dayton’s contrived diatribe sounded exceptionally desparate:

During a news conference Tuesday, Dayton said Republicans are “making a mockery of the word oversight” and engaging in a “propaganda campaign” aimed at destroying MNsure.

“It is really irresponsible,” Dayton said. “The fact that they can pretend this is part of the oversight process is just ludicrous. They want to trash MNsure. … They want MNsure to fail.”

Gov. Dayton’s faux outrage isn’t convincing. Gov. Dayton insists that Republicans are “making a mockery” of the oversight process. That won’t last long:

State Sen. Tony Lourey, the DFL co-chair of the oversight panel, said Republicans have “legitimate questions” that deserve to be answered.

“We do need to answer for how the rollout occurred, and we certainly will,” Lourey said. “I am totally open to that.”

This is political trouble for Gov. Dayton. Jim Nobles, the much-respected Legislative Auditor, launched an investigation into MNsure’s disastrous rollout. Sen. Tony Lourey, the DFL co-chair of the MNsure Legislative Oversight Committee, just said the Republicans’ questions are “legitimate” and that they deserve to be answered.

Most importantly, Gov. Dayton is acting like a monarch, telling the uppity peasants what he will and won’t do. If Gov. Dayton continues acting like royalty who can ignore legitimate questions, he’ll be in for a difficult re-election campaign.

It’s difficult to picture this turning out well for him if he continues acting like this.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

This LTE is stunning from the standpoint that President Potter apparently is trying to blame everyone but himself for the trust deficit that’s prevalent on the SCSU campus:

After reading articles in the Times, watching the Editorial Board’s interview with St. Cloud State University President Earl H. Potter III, and reading the findings of two surveys, one wonders what efforts the president has made to address trust within the university.

In the interview, the president spoke of the culture and character of the university, which, he said, “has developed over the decades. And there are elements of the culture which are not helpful in achieving our mission.” He continued, “The level of trust that exists between faculty, staff and administration is not what it needs to be.”

President Potter apparently can’t admit that he’s the problem. When the GPTWI asked SCSU employees if “management is competent”, they asked if President Potter’s administration is competent. They didn’t ask if previous administrations were competent. When the GPTWI asked people if “management’s actions matched its words”, they asked if President Potter’s administration’s actions matched President Potter’s words. They didn’t ask whether previous administrations’ actions matched their words. When the GPTWI asked SCSU employees if “management made sound financial decisions”, they asked if President Potter’s administration made the right financial decisions. They didn’t ask if previous administrations had made the right financial decisions.

If Holly Schoenherr recommended that SCSU spend $49,900 on a survey to determine whether previous administrations were competent, the outcry would be deafening. That didn’t happen, though, because a significant percentage of respondents have worked at SCSU for less than 7 years. That’s how long President Potter has been SCSU’s president.

Here are some bullet points on the LTE:

  1. Lack of trust will continue until campus can trust Potter.
  2. Morale problem didn’t exist to this extent under previous leaders.
  3. Editorial Board needs to meet with faculty, staff groups.

Actually, I’d disagree with the last bullet point. The Times’ reporters should meet with the faculty. I’d recommend that they interview rank-and-file professors. The last thing that’s needed is for the Times’ reporters to meet with Steve Hornstein and other pro-administration faculty sellouts.

Otherwise, I totally agree with the first 2 bullet points. Faculty don’t trust President Potter because, in their words, his words haven’t matched his actions. According to the GPTWI Trust Index Survey, 76% of faculty said President Potter’s words didn’t match his actions.

There’s no question that this is the lowest morale has been in years at SCSU. The only question is whether President Potter will change.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

After I wrote this post about how the IRRRB, which is essentially run by the DFL, granted 2 loans to Meyer Teleservices, I started thinking things through about the corporation. First, let’s review what this company did:

The company was founded in St. Cloud in 1977; opened its Little Falls office in 1999; and then launched on the Range in Eveleth in 2007.

It was a company with direct ties and allegiance to the Democratic Party. After Republican President Richard Nixon’s resignation over the Watergate scandal the business created an “… innovative small donor fundraising program called the Dollars for Democrats program,” according to the Meyer Teleservices website.

At this point, taxpayers are footing the bill for a company that received taxpayer-subsidized loans to run a fundraising operation for Democrats. It’s more than that, though. Here’s more:

The St. Cloud-based company also leaves behind a debt of about $250,000 to the Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation Board, which had issued two loans totaling $650,000 to the business for its Eveleth facility.

I’d ask which idiots were stupid enough to make a second loan to the company but we know which idiots made the second loan. I even think we know why they made that second loan. The IRRRB, aka DFL North, made that second loan to keep the fundraising operation going through the last election.

Wasn’t it clear that the company was failing? The taxpayers are on the hook for $250,000 in debt that Meyer Teleservices hasn’t repaid. Surely, somebody should’ve noticed that when Meyer applied for the second loan. Certainly, this information should’ve sent red flags into the air into the air if the IRRRB was paying attention:

Fundraising through telemarketing was its major service and revenue source. But the business model proved too outdated in recent years for today’s mobile phone society.

“Land lines are decreasing eight to twelve percent per year. And because of court rulings we can’t, we can’t consciously dial cell phone numbers. And a lot of politicians are now using the Internet to raise funds,” Owen said.

The owner said, “We did everything we could to stay open. I went all in. I basically lost all my retirement and took out mortgages on two houses. And the former owner put in $380,000 last year to try to keep us afloat. He’s out that now, too.”

Notice that Owens’ and Meyer’s money went to prop up a business destined for failure. It didn’t go to pay off the debt. That’s because fundraising for Democrats was more important to Meyer, Owens and the IRRRB. Taxpayers shouldn’t get shafted because the IRRRB, which is the DFL’s office on the Range, didn’t care about taxpayers. These 2 sentences should’ve been the brightest red flags imaginable to the IRRRB:

But the business model proved too outdated in recent years for today’s mobile phone society. Land lines are decreasing eight to twelve percent per year.

The first question that I have is simple. It’s impossible to think that the IRRRB cared about taxpayers if they knew this information. And it’s impossible to think they didn’t know this information. They aren’t that ignorant.

Legally, the DFL doesn’t owe Minnesota’s taxpayers a penny for this. Morally, they’re guilty of shafting Minnesota’s taxpayers out of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Additionally, Mssrs. Meyer and Owens should’ve paid back the loan rather than keeping the fundraising operation afloat.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Charles Koch’s op-ed in Thursday’s WSJ is a fantastic fact-filled defense of himself and his corporation.

Koch companies employ 60,000 Americans, who make many thousands of products that Americans want and need. According to government figures, our employees and the 143,000 additional American jobs they support generate nearly $11.7 billion in compensation and benefits. About one-third of our U.S.-based employees are union members.

Koch employees have earned well over 700 awards for environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many of them from the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials have commended us for our “commitment to a cleaner environment” and called us “a model for other companies.”

Harry Reid said Charles Koch was “un-American.” If winning awards from the EPA for environmental excellence is un-American, then we need more of that type of un-Americanism. If winning awards for safety from OSHA is Sen. Reid’s definition of being un-American, then let’s have a new wave of that type of un-Americanism.

Let’s be blunt, though. This won’t stop Sen. Reid from criticizing the Koch Brothers. This op-ed won’t stop Al Franken from using the Koch Brothers as villains in his fundraising emails. That’s because they don’t care about facts. That’s because facts are irrelevant to dishonest people like Sen. Reid and Sen. Franken. This information isn’t relevant to Sen. Reid either:

Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.

It’s indisputable that Koch Industries are good corporate citizens. The top Obama fundraisers got guaranteed loans for green energy initiatives, then went bankrupt. Koch Industries asked for corporate welfare to stop. That comparison proves that Koch Industries’ priorities are the American people’s priorities.

It’s instructive that the Democrats villainize a corporation that’s a great corporate citizens. It’s instructive that Democrats sat silent when corporations that raised millions of dollars for Presiden Obama gets a guaranteed loan from the taxpayers, then files for bankruptcy.

It’s time for this nation to turn the page on this chapter in American history. It’s time to chart a new direction. It’s time to trust in the American people again. It’s time to stop listening to dishonest politicians like Sen. Reid and Sen. Franken. Finally, it’s time to start praising good corporate citizens like Koch Industries.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Stories like this prove that the DFL is built on cronyism and taxpayers’ money. Here’s a little background first:

EVELETH — Meyer Teleservices in Progress Park has closed its doors on the Iron Range, leaving 104 people unemployed.

The St. Cloud-based company also leaves behind a debt of about $250,000 to the Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation Board, which had issued two loans totaling $650,000 to the business for its Eveleth facility.

“It was a pretty tough day (Monday),” said Gary Owen, company owner and CFO, in a telephone interview Tuesday afternoon. “I went up there and talked with the good people working for us. They are good employees with warm hearts. Some of them even said they were more concerned about me.”

Meyer Teleservices also on Monday shuttered its other Minnesota offices in St. Cloud and Little Falls.

According to Kevin Allenspach’s article, Meyer Teleservices was started in 1976 by Larry Meyer. I haven’t confirmed that the Larry Meyer mentioned in this article is former St. Cloud Mayor Larry Meyer but I’m betting it is. After all, there can’t be many St. Cloud businessmen named Larry Meyer, much less that are capable of this:

Owen bought the company from employee ownership last October and said he subsequently lost all of his retirement savings and took out two property mortgages in an effort to keep the business going. Meyer also infused the business with $380,000 last year, to no avail.

“Larry was very gracious and you can only go to the well so many times,” said Owen, who worked for Meyer Teleservices for 25 years. “We just weren’t able to turn a profit.”

Here’s where the cronyism comes in:

The equipment is collateral for the IRRRB loans, but Commissioner Tony Sertich said in a telephone interview Tuesday evening that he is right now more concerned with the workers who lost their jobs.

“We’ll sort that out in the coming weeks,” he said about the financial situation and where the agency will line up regarding the money it is owed. “It’s always hard to see job losses. This week it’s about empathizing with families who lost their jobs.”

The company was founded in St. Cloud in 1977; opened its Little Falls office in 1999; and then launched on the Range in Eveleth in 2007.

It was a company with direct ties and allegiance to the Democratic Party. After Republican President Richard Nixon’s resignation over the Watergate scandal the business created an “… innovative small donor fundraising program called the Dollars for Democrats program,” according to the Meyer Teleservices website.

The IRRRB gets tons of cash in taxpayer appropriations each biennium. Here’s the IRRRB’s alleged mission:

Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation Board (IRRRB) is a State of Minnesota development agency located in Eveleth, Minnesota. IRRRB’s mission is to promote and invest in business, community and workforce development for the betterment of northeastern Minnesota.

IRRRB provides vital funding, including low or no interest loans, grants and loan guarantees for businesses relocating or expanding in the region. Additionally, a variety of grants are available to local units of government, education institutions, and nonprofits that promote workforce development and sustainable communities.

How does lending money to a DFL phone bank “promote workforce development and sustainable communities”? How does lending money to a DFL fundraising operation provide for “the betterment of northeastern Minnesota”? How many other DfL operations has the IRRRB loaned to other companies? How many pro-DFL operations have received “a variety of grants” available to “education institutions and nonprofits”?

The loan to Meyer Teleservices was approved in 2007, which means that David Dill and Tom Bakk almost certainly voted to approve this ‘loan.’ Aside from the cronyism, it’s worth noting that the IRRRB ‘invested’ taxpayer money in an outdated system that was designed to benefit the DFL. It’s also worth noting that this venture in pro-DFL cronyism lost the taxpayers money before going bankrupt.

Is this the type of Minnesota you want to live in? Are these the type of people we want running state government? I’d passionately argue that Mssrs. Sertich, Bakk and Dill are the last people who should have their hands on the levers of state and local government.

This is a taxpayer rip-off that specifically benefited the DFL. That type of cronyism/corruption must end ASAP.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The DFL must see the Bill of Rights, specifically the First Amendment, as utterly annoying. What other reason would the DFL have for pushing that’s already been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court? This language from HF1944 looks familiar:

Subdivision 1. Electioneering communication. (a) “Electioneering communication” means a communication distributed by television, radio, satellite, or cable broadcasting system; by means of printed material, signs, or billboards; or through the use of telephone communications that:
(1) refers to a clearly identified candidate;
(2) is made within:
(i) 30 days before a primary election or special primary election for the office sought by the candidate; or (ii) 60 days before a general election or special election for the office sought by the candidate; (3) is targeted to the relevant electorate; and (4) is made without the express or implied consent, authorization, or cooperation of, and not in concert with or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate or a candidate’s principal campaign committee or agent.
(b) If an electioneering communication clearly directs recipients to another communication, including a Web site, on-demand or streaming video, or similar communications, the electioneering communication consists of both the original electioneering communication and the communication to which recipients are directed and the cost of both must be included when determining if disclosure is required under this section.

McCain-Feingold, aka the BCRA, prohibited certain types of speech 30 days before a primary election and/or 60 days before the general election. Here’s the relevant part of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling:

The statute is underinclusive; it only protects a dissenting shareholder’s interests in certain media for 30 or 60 days before an election when such interests would be implicated in any media at any time.

Here’s another important part of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. the FEC:

Because speech is an essential mechanism of democracy—it is the means to hold officials ac-countable to the people—political speech must prevail against lawsthat would suppress it by design or inadvertence. Laws burdening such speech are subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the Government to prove that the restriction “furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.”

Despite that clear ruling, the DFL insists on pushing a bill that includes provisions that the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled unconstitutional. It isn’t just that they’ve ruled these provisions unconstitutional, either. It’s that they said future legislation had to pass strict scrutiny, which is described like this:

subject to strict scrutiny, which requires the Government to prove that the restriction “furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.”

The DFL knows that this is an extra-high hurdle that they likely can’t overcome. What’s disturbing is that the DFL isn’t hesitating in writing legislation that violates people’s rights to participate in the political process.

This is the definition of shameful, too:

Question: Why do Democrats hate certain types of political speech?

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Dave Unze’s article about the Great Place to Work Trust Index Survey included this interesting paragraph:

The survey was offered to all 1,582 university employees and generated a response from 40 percent of them. The university released the answers to two questions that were asked of those employees: What makes St. Cloud State a great place to work, and what would make the school a better place to work?

The administration needs to tell us why they’re hiding the Trust Index Survey results on a password-protected webpage that only people with a St. Cloud State account can access. Why wasn’t the entire survey released to the public? Why were only two open-ended questions released?

The St. Cloud Times needs to answer the legitimate question of why they didn’t demand that SCSU release everything from the survey, including the PowerPoint presentation. That PowerPoint presentation includes the results from some questions that I’m sure President Potter and his senior administration would rather see buried in the deep blue sea.

I’m certain President Potter would rather people not see this graphic:

Why would President Potter want people to see that only 20% of his employees think that “Management shares information openly and transparently”? President Potter certainly wouldn’t want the community to know that only 26% of his employees think that “Management delivers on its promises” and that only 24% of his employees think “Management’s actions match its words.”

It isn’t difficult to understand why President Potter doesn’t want the community to know that 28% of his employees think that “Management makes sound financial decisions” and that only 32% of employees think he’s competent. A university president doesn’t want it getting out that the vast majority of his employees think he’s incompetent and makes foolish financial decisions.

The past couple of weeks, the editorial page of the St. Cloud Times criticized a local school board and a city council for not being transparent. They’re right in calling for greater transparency from the school board and the city council. What’s puzzling is why the Times didn’t demand that same type of transparency from President Potter. Shouldn’t St. Cloud State be held to the same level of scrutiny as the Sartell-St. Stephen school board and the Cold Spring City Council?

Don’t St. Cloud residents deserve the same level of information-sharing that Sartell residents deserve.

If the Times won’t demand it, I will. President Potter, make all of the information from the GPTW Trust Index Survey available to the public. The Survey was paid for with taxpayers money. Public employees participated by filling out the Survey. Therefore, all information, including the PowerPoint presentation, should be public property. Period.

That level of secretiveness shouldn’t be tolerated from university presidents. The only thing worse is a media outlet that won’t push public officials for public information. Not pushing public officials for public information lets the University escape scrutiny and accountability.

The Times needs to ask itself an important question, namely, do they value accountability more than access to President Potter? If they prioritize accountability, then they’ll have to push President Potter.

President Potter needs to ask himself a question, too. Is being popular more important than doing the right thing? Based on this survey, his employees think President Potter puts a higher priority on staying popular in the community than he puts on doing the right thing.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,