OPINION: Arcadia Deserves More Transparency
The public deserves to know why Arcadia is without a police chief and what the city officials intend to do about it. Unfortunately, members of the city government disagree.
But, there’s one small problem with the city’s action. It isn’t just that the public deserves more information, it has a legal right to information. The city council is scheduled to meet on the topic for a second time tonight. Like the first time, the meeting is scheduled to be closed to the public.
That isn’t right.
The city first discussed the issue behind closed doors on Jan. 15. It cited Wisconsin State statute 19.85 (1)(c), which allows closed sessions to discuss matters concerning public employees. That same statute is being cited for tonight’s meeting. The problem is that the statute is designed to protect employees and legal action that could stem from disclosing private information. It explicitly and intentionally does not allow the city to close the meeting to discuss positions of employment in general.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice Open Meeting Compliance Guide states: “The language of the exemption refers to a “public employee” rather than to positions of employment in general… Thus Wis. Stat 19.85(1)(c) authorized a closed session to discuss the qualifications of and salary to offer a specific applicant, but does not authorize a closed session to discuss the qualifications and salary range for the position in general.”
To me, it’s clear that the public has a right to know that the city does not have a chief of police. Furthermore, it has a right to know how the city intends to fill the vacancy.
I protested the Jan. 15 closed session, but never received a response. The action from that closed session was to allow Mayor John Kimmel to hire an interim chief. That doesn’t sound to me like it fits the requirements for a closed session.
The wording in the closed session specifically states “Police Chief Hire” which, to me, indicates the city would be limited to deciding who to hire in closed session before making the hire official in open session. The closed session does not authorize the council to decide who will do the hiring, how much the position will be paid, or what qualifications the city is looking for.
I also protested the Jan. 29 closed session but, as of this writing, have not received a response. It’s possible that the city is hiring a new police chief tonight, which could make the closed session valid. But that wasn’t the case on Jan. 15 and, as far as I know, the council hasn’t even authorized posting the position yet. As of noon on Jan. 29, it was not posted on the city website, Wilenet or advertised in the official city newspaper.
There is also the matter of why the vacancy exists in the first place. City officials have publicly criticized the police department, specifically regarding speeding on Wilson Ave. Doesn’t the public at least deserve to know why Diana Anderson is no longer the chief there? I’ve done some digging and found that she resigned — who could blame her? The Arcadia Police Department initiated 36 felony cases last year, way more than any other police department in the county (Blair was next highest with 24, no others had more than 13). Yet, her employer only seemed to care about speeding. That’s politics in a nutshell.
Arcadia’s slogan has long been “Arcadia Is More,” but when it comes to the operation of the city government, it should be “Arcadia Deserves More.”
OK, I’ll admit that doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.