Pat Peckham on 
CityKid on “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
I, Dino Corvino, support the rights of Marathon County Administrator Brad Karger to attend, speak at, and support a march that he believes in. I support his right to do this in his off time, when he is not being paid by the taxpayers, when he is a private citizen. I support his First Amendment right of free speech unencumbered by a government body.
I further support individuals and groups to be critical of Brad Karger, private citizen, for attending a march, or event that they oppose. They have every right to voice this criticism to Brad, to their social media feed, to anyone they want to. This includes his employer.
I oppose the actions taken by the Marathon County Board to suspend Brad Karger for attending a legally protected protest in his free time. I feel that the vote to suspend Brad reflects badly, and borders on a violation of his free speech. He has the right to speech, without government censorship or punishment as a private citizen. He has been punished, and I believe his rights were violated.
More than any time in history we have an opportunity to hear from County Supervisors on why they voted to suspend Brad Karger. I extend this invitation to all of them, reach out to us at Citizen Wausau, we will publish your explanation without comment for the public to see. If you are not a writer, you can take part in my podcast called Here You are Wausau, and we will allow you a chance to explain your vote there if you like.
Supervisors, I urge you to explain your actions. Without information in the public, the public is free to go with any narrative it settles upon. You should explain this vote.
“with great power comes great responsibility”
I do not disagree with you, Dino, for one second on Mr. Karger’s rights to free speech, and to assemble, and to take part in protest assemblies, or rights assemblies, etc.
The problem comes when you are a public figure, a government leader, you must be aware that often your actions as an individual can be tied to your position that you hold, and if you are the spokesperson for that body of government, you need to be well aware that even if you are doing something on your own time, the public may not know you are on your own time and may believe that you are speaking for the government body you typically represent.
Would this be different if he was only at the rally vs actually speaking at it? Maybe. Would this be different if his attire was more casual and was not similar to the attire that he wears when representing the county? Maybe. Would this be different if, when he was introduced, his job title with the county was not mentioned? Probably.
He was there, on his own accord, on his own time, representing himself. Was there any practical way for the public to know that he was not representing the County?
I go back to those days at the radio station… when it was made very clear that I always had to, a couple of times per show, clearly state “the views and opinions of Dr. Rent are solely mine and do not reflect those of this station, its ownership, management, etc.”
At any point did he make it clear that he was speaking for himself and not the county? That, I think is the issue.
With any right and with any freedom, good judgment must be used in exercise of that right or freedom.
Absolutely none of that matters. None of that.
He has the right to free speech, as a citizen.
A government body punished him financially for exercising that right.
Normally I am all about the unintended consequences thing, but not now. Either he has free speech, or he does not.
I wish I had a better understanding of the position of the police leaders. It is difficult for me to grasp how Mr. Karger’s participation in the public event (call a rally, a protest, a march of support, whatever) constitutes an anti-law enforcement position. To be sure, Mr. Karger is a modest scapegoat in that he can financially deal with little issue the one month suspension on his 130K salary with no great hardship. But the chilling of public discourse is palpable and disturbing. The dilemma is undeniable – isn’t the protection of our right to grievance and critique of the status quo a cornerstone of the role of law? Bizarre times.
I do not need to know the motivation of anyone here. Nor do I need to read from members of the County Board that their vote to affirm suspension was a needed compromise to prevent termination.
Is there an interesting story about the Police Chief and the Sherriff colluding with Department Heads to build this case? Maybe. But, again, the actions of a government body to punish someone for attending a legal rally is the crux of this for me.
I think the motivation of the key players is signficant. Along the lines of my arguments for the last 15 years, the decadence of the public has now reached a critical mass. The police have no real ability to right the ship of state as enforcement and incarceration merely pull more resources away from regenerative programs such as treatment, education and community development. The people, ignorant and superstitious, expect a kind of perfection on the part of the police (and educators) to act as the foundation for their crumbling status quo. Since the center cannot hold and the people lack the strength to mortify, society spirals out of control – tweakers, drunks, junkies, abusers, molesters, thugs and sundry crazies make this an unsafe environment – one where parents are reluctant to let their kids walk or ride their bikes to play in public settings – as a parent, one has a nagging fear of danger whenever a kid is off the grid in an environment like this. And law enforcement has to deal with this every day.
If the citizens of Wausau are smart they will tell the police to shut up and back off. Wausau police along with Marathon Cnty police have recently, and routinely, refused to provide the local press with any information about what they are up to and what they have done. Seems power only flows one way in Marathon Cnty. Power is not supposed to come from the police, it’s supposed to come from the citizens. Make your own bed and sleep in it.
Police do not rule the roost. Buck-up Wausau – other towns have:
“‘Black Lives Matter’ Banner on City Hall Divides a Boston Suburb”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/black-lives-matter-banner-on-city-hall-divides-a-boston-suburb.html?_r=0
I’m in Barcelona, Spain today. How different things are here.
So what is Chief Jeff Hardel’s job history? Is he from Wausau, or is he a hire on from outside. I went to Washington Central, Horace Mann, and Wausau East. I never met anybody named Hardel. I looked for Hardel’s resume online but came up with nothing. What authority has Chief Hadel used to complain about Brad Karger; it’s unclear from all the news reports I’ve read? Is this the same police cheif that takes weeks or months to furnish information to the public (via the Fourth Estate)?
I wanted to note how wrong you are regarding limitations to freedom of speech Dino. There are oh so many curbs to the unreasonable use of speech like bomb-threats or slander or yelling fire in a crowded theatre when there is none. However, reasonable speech is protected and must be defended. Mr. Karger was well within his rights to use his freedom of speech at a peace march. The county board is lost in the minutia of whether or not they agree with his position. That’s irrelevant to his first amendment privilege as it is quite reasonable to argue that a 15 year old should not be treated as an adult in the criminal justice system. Your argument Dino that anything he says or does (such as show support the KKK) would be protected is incorrect. If he did such a thing (which of course he didn’t), his job would be forfeit.
Of course that is true.
I am on the other side of that discussion, and assumed people know that.
We both agree with respect to Mr. Karger’s actions. I humbly suggest that this whole situation displays the loss of the liberal arts as a means for the functioning of society. In the stead of moral, defensible argument, we see the rise of supersitition. Superstition does not require reason. Beware the crowd.
What hours does he work for the county. 8am-5pm. NO. 9am-6pm. NO. 1pm-10pm NO. He is an exempt employee paid by the taxpayer. Was the mayor there? Does your paper approve of you meddling in the City affairs? Did your employer approve of you pushing this idea? Shame on you for such doings. Was he backing the protesters? Was he trying to stop the protest? What was he doing there? Does he normally attend such functions. Does he always show up for such events or not usually? What position did he represent for the county taxpayer? Was it a city or a county parade permit? Did they pay for the license to parade? If not why did police do nothing. If it was a county event was the sheriff there?
I will do these one at a time.
What hours does he work for the county. 8am-5pm. NO. 9am-6pm. NO. 1pm-10pm NO. He is an exempt employee paid by the taxpayer. Was the mayor there?
Yes. The Mayor was there.
Does your paper approve of you meddling in the City affairs?
One, I do not have a paper. Two, not sure what meddling means.
Did your employer approve of you pushing this idea?
My employer does not matter.
Shame on you for such doings. Was he backing the protesters?
I have no idea what he was doing there. Was he trying to stop the protest?
You can read the reporting yourself.
What was he doing there?
Reporting indicates speaking in support of the community.
Does he normally attend such functions. Does he always show up for such events or not usually?
Not sure.
What position did he represent for the county taxpayer?
He didn’t.
Was it a city or a county parade permit?
No idea.
Did they pay for the license to parade?Reporting indicates they did.
If not why did police do nothing. If it was a county event was the sheriff there?
Again, you can seek out the reporting on your own.