This case has been lingering about the City of Wausau for some time. It appears that a judgement was handed down. For the complete judgment see the link below.
Van De Yacht Decision.10.13.09
October 14, 2009, Wausau, WI – Judge Barbara Crabb of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin has granted a motion for summary judgment in the matter of Christine Van De Yacht vs. the City of Wausau and James Tipple, William Nagle, Michael Morrissey and Ann Werth in their individual capacities. This closes the case, unless it is appealed by Van De Yacht.
morty
6:11 pm on October 14th
I assume she’ll appeal?
Saltpeter
3:16 pm on October 15th
This information hit CW about 26 hours ago. Why so little response here? No interest? All I have to say is that my sources were waaaay off. They made it sound like this was going in the opposite direction, hugely. They were obviously wrong. That often seems to be the way the legal system works. It ain’t over…’till it’s over.
What’s to appeal? If I read the findings correctly, she was wronged. She just can’t do anything about it. They’re immune.
Pat Peckham
11:00 pm on October 15th
The outcome was interesting, for sure. A major part of her beef was the idea that folks at City Hall — if they knew she was about to enter conflict-of-interest-land — could have warned her, but they were able to say, “We thought she knew.” She claimed she was allowed to walk into something because of things she had said in the past, but the judge said she was in the position of power, so she wasn’t all that much of a victim. The judge seemed to say that if you’re going to sail the political seas, don’t come to me if you get wet.
Pat Peckham
11:00 pm on October 15th
The outcome was interesting, for sure. A major part of her beef was the idea that folks at City Hall — if they knew she was about to enter conflict-of-interest-land — could have warned her, but they were able to say, “We thought she knew.” She claimed she was allowed to walk into something because of things she had said in the past, but the judge said she was in the position of power, so she wasn’t all that much of a victim. The judge seemed to say that if you’re going to sail the political seas, don’t come to me if you get wet.
Dino Corvino
11:23 pm on October 15th
Peter, I am aware of the same talk as you are. I think Pat is aware of this talk. The idea of immunity implies something that simply has not been proven.
From my reading, Van De Yacht made a claim, a judge read the claim. And dismissed the claim.
It is not fair to use immune as a description. This was not a local judge, nor in anyway a statement about anything other than the charges brought by Van De Yacht.
I think the allegations are interesting, and maybe someday she will make them all available to everyone.
CW did approach her, we exchanged some pleasant emails, and I think I recall one with the attorney. We offered to give her a forum to let people know what she was alleging.
Maybe now, she will take us up on the offer. It is important to read the judgement.
John H. Fischer
7:46 am on October 16th
My opinion on the whole matter changed quite a while ago with an interesting phone call that I recieved from Van De Yacht.
This was when this story hit the WDH, again it had to be a year or more ago. There were comments being made about the story and the call came a few days after the online discussion was held.
In the past, I had been on Van De Yacht’s side, I had seen some long time members of city staff (some now gone, a few still there) “muscle around” a couple of council members who didn’t “toe the line” like the staff thought they should. If I was able to see some of this on the surface as a casual observer, I can only imagine what was going on behind the scenes. So, to me, her being “set up” was not outside of the realm of possiblity.
However, I get a phone call after this online discussion, and it was a short, but not exactly friendly conversation. I was told I needed to get my facts straight before posting things online. I was not threatened myself with a lawsuit, but it was made clear there might be consequences if I continued to make statements without foundation.
To those who have read my posts over the years, you may understand why the tone and demeanor of this call completely caught me off guard.
I was able to go back and find the online conversation. I was able to see the comments that she was referring to. I was also able to see that those were comments that I (who have always – AND ONLY – posted as Dr Rent) did NOT make.
In the call, she had said that she had not seen the comments herself, but were only told about them, told they came from me, and as I really don’t hide who I am online, she called me to let me know of her displeasure with those comments. (Although not a big fan of anonymous online posting as was discussed here on CitizenWausau, incidents like this allow me to understand the need some have for keeping their real identity private)
Those comments to the WDH article, specifically questioned how, procedurely, such a thing could happen. It would make no sense for me to make such a post because I understood exactly how the system could be manipulated, and knowing some of the personalities involved, I do understand how this could happen.
However, although the value of someone like me “being in her corner” is probably pretty close to zero, after that phone call, I ceased to care how this whole thing turned out.
(and in all honesty, I would not be surprised if this post prompted another phone call – it is the reason that I did not respond, and I question myself if writing this comment is a smart thing to do – but I was working in my back shed until after midnight, am tired, and probably not using the best judgement)
Saltpeter
8:16 am on October 16th
DC, read the third paragraph, last sentence…”motion granted on the ground of qualified IMMUNITY”. It’s a form of the word; I get the points!!!
PP is right, she got roughed up w/ the all too typical city hall treatment, and tried to strike back. I thought the case was better than it now sounds. And…all for $50K??
John was right too, this is really a non-issue. I guess that’s good. A bit of light shed on a City Hall issue that may help the back-biting problems that go on there all the time. I hope it does not deepen the divide. We’ve got important business to transact in this community.
John H. Fischer
8:23 am on October 16th
That is one potential good thing that could come out of all of this…
That the political backstabbing, the personality power plays, all of the behind the scenes crap that seems to go on at all levels of government (not just Wausau’s City Hall) needs to seriously stop.
We have issues facing us, we need for our elected leaders to lead.. we need for government staff to serve. If you disagree, handle the disagreements in a civil public forum as our forefathers intended.
Do not handle disagreements by trying to backstab, sabotage, or discredit the other person.
However, I am not so naive as to believe the system will change. It is what it is, and in order to be effective, you have to learn the play the game – and the longer you play the game – the better you become at it.
Novice elected leaders beware!
Saltpeter
8:54 am on October 16th
Johnny…you speak a powerful piece. I think you should accelerate your plans to enter politics. Too bad you’re not living in the city. It would be a great place for you to start. You’d make a great mayor!
Dino Corvino
10:53 am on October 16th
Thanks Peter…I missed that part. My bad.
I listened to Van De Yacht on 550 am this morning, and I am sort of interested in this sense by certain folks in the community that there are conspiratorial forces at work in the halls of our city hall.
I tend to think that for a conspiracy to work, or be effective, there has to be a pay off. Money, power, pretty girls or cars. You know, the usual.
It just seems like the rich guys tend to stay rich, and we do not have any new rich guys.
So, I am not sure how this is much more than sort of sour grapes about Morrissey having a temper tantrum. And that is like being mad that it rains or snows. It snows. Morrissey has tantrums.
John H. Fischer
10:57 am on October 16th
“It just seems like the rich guys tend to stay rich, and we do not have any new rich guys.”
In addition, those with power tend to stay in power, and we do not have any new people in power.
Like I said, I have seen the manipulation of the system. I have learned how to work in the system as it is, but Dino, if you want to by me a beer sometime, I can give you some “off the record” examles
Pat Peckham
7:22 pm on October 16th
If there is an attorney out there who could explain “qualified immunity,” that might help us. My understanding is that this is different from diplomatic immunity and basically says that public officials doing what they feel is the right thing have some level of immunity.
If you are a public official and you know Alderperson A would like to run you out of a job and you see Alderperson A possibly marching into something you believe sincerely that she knows is wrong, you might keep your mouth shut, too. If the situation makes the public official think that the Alderperson is knowingly violating a law or regulation, the public official might pause and consider whether he ought to speak up.
A key little factoid here is whether this elected official was ever “educated” about steering clear of any project that had been assisted with city-administered funds. I have heard she was not warned at any time during her term in office and I have heard she was warned. Getting to the bottom of that would be a good thing, but you’d still need to wrestle with the issue of whether she truly stood to benefit if the developer got a cheap loan from the city.
Last point: The boys on the radio this morning who said she was persecuted for her political beliefs are all wet.
Saltpeter
7:20 am on October 20th
I’m trying to take the high road here…but I’m “in” for that beer with the Good Doctor. Could be an interesting conversation. Wear something fire proof.
Mr. Peckham…I think you may be a bit damp yourself, to think they are so off base. If you are not on “their side”…then you are on the “dark side’. You see what happens then. I know you’ve sat and listened often. Tell me you haven’t seen it…often.
Michelle
12:15 pm on October 20th
I guess I’m just confused. Why does there have to be sides? When I ran for council, I didn’t know anyone one the council, on the city staff, or in the mayors office.
Once elected I took it upon myself to call department heads, so I could introduce myself. I set up a meeting with the mayor so I could meet him. I also ended up having conversations with most members of the council.
I came in as an outsider. I didn’t come in with a list of people to try to get fired. I didn’t come in with agendas. I wanted to work with everyone. When I had questions City staff always answered them for me. I believe I had a positive relationship with them because I was polite, I asked informed questions, and I wasn’t out to make a fool out of people. I remember sitting in a commitee meeting and a council member demanded documentation for something a city staff member said. So that person had to run and find the documentation, make copies and then distribute them. When it could have been easily handled by calling the staff member before the meeting and asked for the documentation. It was instance to try to catch someone off guard.
I voted for my district. I didn’t vote consistantly with either side. To this day I can honestly say I am on friendly terms with 9 out of the other 11 council members and all city staff. A little common courtesy on both ends goes a long way.
Saltpeter
10:22 am on October 21st
Ms. Michelle, why aren’t you in that position, now? Sounds like you could be a positive force, which is badly needed there. It would set a great example, and at the very least, not contribute to the divide mentality.
“A little common courtesy on both ends goes a long way” is true and nice. I have found just that, very, very little “common courtesy” within the halls of City Hall. I’m glad your experiences have been different. I’m going to keep on trying. Like Doc says, you need to find a way to work within the system…one way or another.