Appropriate Roles, Duties & Perspectives for Public Officers -  This is an issue which will be difficult to describe. Nonetheless, it is important and I believe anyone watching the Council's conduct, around the Charter Amendment, will understand what I hope to describe here:  Unfortunately, I encountered flawed perspectives about the roles and duties of public officers, over and over again, during my time on the Marvin Council. The Village needs to do a better job of finding candidates who understand that "public office" is not an entitlement to "personal power"; nor is it an endowment of infinite citizen trust in the officer's judgment. "The people" endow public officers with power; and elected officials work to fulfill the interests of the people who elected them.  When public officers make decisions they are always expending valuable resources on behalf of citizens (e.g. monetary funds, time, materials, staff hours, professional services, etc.)  Every minute in a meeting, every direction given to a staff member, every act and all refusals to act, should be motivated by the best interpretation an officer can muster of what reasonable people would do, given the same situation, the same options, and the same set of facts. 

​

For example, Village legal funds, expended by the Council, are not their own and should not be used to satisfy personal vendettas or political tugs-of-war. I realize this commentary on the expenditure of legal funds will draw ire from some who are unfamiliar with 'why' the legal settlement climbed to a $75,000 figure. That's unfortunate; because what occurred perfectly illustrates how Council members can cause harm to the Village when they forget what they are "actually" tasked with doing on the part of citizens. Public officers are tasked with making reasonable decisions in the best interest of the Village.  Making decisions solely based on what "feels good" to a public officer, leads to government systems which quickly descend into tyranny. Critics fail to realize that an an offer to settle the lawsuit (which was filed to hold the government accountable for illegal meetings and unlawful actions) was made in October of 2018.  Settling at that time would have cost Village taxpayers $0.00 dollars!  That's correct. Council members had been provided with an offer to settle all legal disputes, at no cost to the Village. Had public officers made a decision, based on what was best for the Village, taxpayers would not have sustained any monetary impact. Instead, personal pride and self-indulgent leadership got in the way and Council members refused a critical opportunity to save funds and settle disputes.  Instead, leadership unnecessarily dragged out an expensive lawsuit, for another six months. Meanwhile fees legal fees climbed, for both parties, on both sides of the issue -- not to mention the money the Council majority voted to give themselves, to defend their unlawful conduct.  The decision not to settle in October 2018, for $0.00 (in exchange for dropping all legal actions) was self-indulgent and negligent and hurt taxpayers in more ways than one. A failure to understand the selfless duties required in public office can cost the village, financially, politically & spiritually, with no appropriate rationale or justification to show for it.

​

For more information like this view the timeline on the 'Welcome​' page

​