A tiny peek at local politics

[1]: http://www.eastsidereviewnews.com/main.asp?SectionID=64&SubSectionID=130&ArticleID=519
[2]: http://www.eastsidereviewnews.com/main.asp?SectionID=64&subsectionID=130&articleID=520
[3]: http://www.eastsidereviewnews.com/
[4]: http://www.ci.maplewood.mn.us/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={E3469DC0-711F-4E1E-BA97-9F58834A3A4E}&DE={3644121E-D861-4AE0-8EFD-F91F1FE06557}

Lately I’ve really enjoyed perusing the local “neighborhood” paper, [The East Side Review][3]. Seeing all the local little things that escape notice in the larger metro area, scanning the police blotter, looking at the ads; it’s all interesting.

Yesterday, I was almost giggling over the coverage over what seems to be a pretty big deal and which plainly has stoked passions: “[Surprise! East Side activist named interim Maplewood manager][1]”. The best I can tell, the Maplewood city council newly has a Republican majority and Mayor Diana Longrie is also a Republican. The city administrator Richard Fursman, who seems not to be, has been fired. Apparently, the mayor and city administrator were not getting along. And Greg Copeland is the surprise *interim* replacement city administrator. An “activist”! Oh no!

Copeland seems to be a long-time, persistent conservative in a region where conservatism isn’t necessarily very cool. (Well, conservatism is actually way cooler. Some folks are just out of touch.) And he may very well be an activist. But it was odd to see the label. I didn’t notice anyone else labeled similarly.

Anyway, I could be completely wrong, but my perception was that author and managing editor Holly Wenzel seems displeased about the firing of the Fursman.

If you read the article, I wonder if you can figure out a substantive reason Fursman was fired. I expect the answer would come back to me “well, no one knows… there *is* no good reason” as this was alluded to in the article. Still, is there really *nothing* to find concerning this? What was the history like since January? What were the city council meetings like? What policies is the mayor wishing to change that Fursman supported? A brief peek through the city council minutes makes me wonder if wetlands/public use/property rights might be a point where they differed.

Sure, that’s a bit of homework, and maybe too much to expect from a small local paper. But then you find the companion story on the jump, “[Greg Copeland, too, has been ousted from office][2]”. Well, apparently *some* research was done then! Go back ten years and we find he was fired, and printed right there is a selection from “a long laundry list of 25 alleged improprieties”.

How odd. Why print a ten year old list of *allegations* about the Republican newcomer, but print nothing negative and no allegations about the fellow actually being fired?

Or, oft-quoted council member Will Rossbach has run for mayor, and Copeland has run for House and Senate, but only Copeland is noted as losing his bids. (Rossbach did, too, and had he garnered just a few hundred more votes, this story could be quite different.)

This is not to say that anyone should refrain from bringing up dirt about Copeland if such dirt exists, but I’m an equal opportunity mud slinger, and would like to see such thorough reporting on all the key players. This is not in any way to suggest Wenzel wrote a hit piece. She didn’t. But I almost felt like I could see a little of where her interest lies in the way things were written, chosen, and researched.

I did get a little chuckle out of Rossbach’s demand “Why don’t we choose someone none of us know?” Well, that’s not really the way it works, is it? I mean, one generally attempts to find qualified, like-minded folks to work with, and generally one draws from the pool they are aware of. It seems Rossbach may have been both familiar with and like-minded with Fursman. Does that automatically disqualify Fursman?

Kathy Juenemann, the other minority council member, gave me one more chuckle:

> “It’s hard for me to comprehend that you can decide who manages the city on behalf of all the residents and five elected officials,” Juenemann said, returning to the Copeland question. “There is no way three people can just decide what’s going on. It’s not OK.”

This is so interesting to me. That’s what city councils do. They are a very small group of people whose majority votes decide who “manages the city on behalf of all the residents and five elected officials”. Sure, it’s a less palatable concept when you’re no longer on the majority, but it’s the same concept that was used when Rossbach and Juenemann were in the majority. Where was the protest back then?

If the firing/hiring process wasn’t legal, it should be challenged, but that appears not to be the case. So I don’t think their protests really seem to amount to much.

By the way, this is not an apologetic for Copeland. I don’t know the guy. I don’t know his track record. And both Juenemann and Rossbach seem like fine folks from the minimal Googling I did. This isn’t about them in particular. It was the story and the way it was told that struck chords with me.

One last thing. I wonder if this happens more on a local political scale. Note that Mayor Longrie said “When I went to church, everybody wanted to shake my hand and say ‘You’re doing the right thing.'” I don’t often hear of public officials speaking about church like this. As a place where folks – and they must be archetypical or at least reasonable folks or the point is moot – share their opinions without those opinions being relegated to the standard few divisive topics. Rossbach, too, notes his involvement with his church in various places like his bios.

Nationally, churches and denominations often seem to move as chess pieces for battling ideologies. But this local level finds a couple of folks from seemingly different perspectives publicly valuing church without “invoking” church. I like that.

P.S. Though the article leads me to believe there’s a conservative-liberal split on the council, it doesn’t seem at my distance to be an extreme one. For instance, Rossbach sounds fairly conservative [here][4]. Maybe if someone knows more detail, they can comment below.

2 thoughts on “A tiny peek at local politics”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.