Completing the cyber–Security Report. Auditor speaks out on Prairie Dog Fund telling the Commissioners that they better hope that fund arrives in the Commissioners meeting. That is an official stand when spoken in the meeting.
A Constituent speaks up on the positive effect of measure 4 and the Chair states he disagrees. He conjectures what it will even look like through creation of more agencies. This discussion at the Commissioners meeting even prompt the Herald Press Journalist to ask, “Are you officially opposing measure 4?” Chairman says no; however, the auditor and the chairman are using the official meeting to discuss their objections to measure 4 and their fear of measure 4 in their meetings. Commissioners represent the people of Wells County. Many in Wells County agree with Measure 4. Who on the Commissioners table represent the people that agree with Measure 4? If no equal support, No discussion should be held at the meeting. A Constituent speaks out in favor of Measure 4. Chairman states, “I disagree”, as if that is the final word. Question: Is the Commissioners avoiding making an official statement of stand against Measure 4 because it is an ethical violation only? Should the State Ethical committee include such discussions like this from elected positions standing against a People Measure?
What are your thoughts on the matter? Comment below.
