Wisconsin GOP senators violated open meetings law, Dane County DA alleges

[danarhea]

Madison — Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne filed a civil complaint Wednesday alleging legislative leaders violated the state's open meetings law last week when a special committee adopted a bill curbing collective bargaining for most public workers.

You couldn't help but see this one coming. LOL. Should this lawsuit prevail in the courts, then Walker is back to square one on his bill to gut the teacher's unions in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the recalls continue unabated.

Article is here.

 

[Ikari]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Of course the People have this right and we'll see what the courts say. But I do have a question about all this. My understanding was that the unions did agree to the cut in pay so long as they had the ability later on when things recover to renegotiate their terms and get back what they had given up. Is this a correct summary? If so, I don't even see the point in gutting the union in the first place.

 

[Amazed]

Whoda thunk it, a Liberal Appointee is challenging this...

 

[danarhea]

Whoda thunk it, a Liberal Appointee is challenging this...

Was the open meetings law violated, or wasn't it? It's a very simple question.

 

[Councilman]

If they do go back to square one then they just bring the original bill to the Senate floor and vote while the Democrats are there, and in doing so beat them with their mistake in doing this.

 

[Barbbtx]

If they do go back to square one then they just bring the original bill to the Senate floor and vote while the Democrats are there, and in doing so beat them with their mistake in doing this.

Wonder if the dems are packing their bags and getting ready to sneak out of town once more?

 

[jamesrage]

You couldn't help but see this one coming. LOL. Should this lawsuit prevail in the courts, then Walker is back to square one on his bill to gut the teacher's unions in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the recalls continue unabated.

Article is here.

It looks like the die hard unions nuts and crybabies are desperately trying any sniveling tactic to over turn Wisconsin's anti-union laws.

 

[Ikari]

It looks like the die hard unions nuts and crybabies are desperately trying any sniveling tactic to over turn Wisconsin's anti-union laws.

Do you think that the people should not have the ability to redress the government?

 

[jamesrage]

Do you think that the people should not have the ability to redress the government?

I believe they the people do. However this is just pettiness on the part of the DA and other sore losers just like the recall petitions and unions trying to intimidate businesses into not supporting the governor . This is basically the same crap the republicans did with trying to disable the democrat's direct pay deposit so that they have to come back to collect their checks, file warrants, threaten to fire every teacher or file charges on the democrats on who fled the state, make false accusations that the democrats were not doing their job and all sorts of other **** to force the democrats to come back to the state to hold a quorum.

 

[Deuce]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Of course the People have this right and we'll see what the courts say. But I do have a question about all this. My understanding was that the unions did agree to the cut in pay so long as they had the ability later on when things recover to renegotiate their terms and get back what they had given up. Is this a correct summary? If so, I don't even see the point in gutting the union in the first place.

This is exactly what happened. The unions agreed to all of the financial demands. This was about the budget after all, right?

Turned down. It was never about the budget, it was about destroying unions and the support those unions give to Democrats. That these idiots have managed to demonize teachers in the process is just sickening.

 

[MaggieD]

You couldn't help but see this one coming. LOL. Should this lawsuit prevail in the courts, then Walker is back to square one on his bill to gut the teacher's unions in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the recalls continue unabated.

Article is here.

If it sticks -- or any of them do -- look for Dems to don their running shoes. Again.

 

[buck]

Was the open meetings law violated, or wasn't it? It's a very simple question.

I've done a little research, and since it was a special session (under senate rule 33 if I recall correctly) they probably did not break the open meeting rule. But we'll know for certain in a couple of weeks.

For us lay people, it quite simply comes down to wether you beleive the non-partisan senate chief or not.

Senate Chief Clerk Rob Marchant said last week that lawmakers gave two hours' notice of the meeting but did not have to because Senate rules do not require public notice for meetings when the Legislatur**e is in special session, and those rules trump the open meetings law because the Legislatur**e was in special session.

 

[buck]

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Of course the People have this right and we'll see what the courts say. But I do have a question about all this. My understanding was that the unions did agree to the cut in pay so long as they had the ability later on when things recover to renegotiate their terms and get back what they had given up. Is this a correct summary? If so, I don't even see the point in gutting the union in the first place.

Because there are real costs to the collective bargaining that was occuring in the state between sympathetic individuals. Captive benefits, emeritus programs, etc, etc.

If you don't believe there are sympathetic individuals representing the tax payers, then how do you explain unions and school districts rushing through new contracts before the new bill can be published? If the school districts just waited a cople of days, they could save a hell lot of money.

 

[Redbeard]

Because there are real costs to the collective bargaining that was occuring in the state between sympathetic individuals. Captive benefits, emeritus programs, etc, etc.

If you don't believe there are sympathetic individuals representing the tax payers, then how do you explain unions and school districts rushing through new contracts before the new bill can be published? If the school districts just waited a cople of days, they could save a hell lot of money.

Nothing more than tactical delays, while stealthily moving forward in districts for the signing of new contracts that would encompass the next two years.

 

[j-mac]

You couldn't help but see this one coming. LOL. Should this lawsuit prevail in the courts, then Walker is back to square one on his bill to gut the teacher's unions in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the recalls continue unabated.

Article is here.

You're dreaming. from your own article here:

A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, said Fitzgerald is confident the law was followed.

Sour grapes dude. I guess the cowards shouldn't have skipped the state eh?


j-mac

 

[randel]

If it sticks -- or any of them do -- look for Dems to don their running shoes. Again.

if it doesnt stick, walker could get something rare out of it...a 'do over'....a chance to limit some of the political fallout and actually sit down and negotiate with the unions.

 

[j-mac]

if it doesnt stick, walker could get something rare out of it...a 'do over'....a chance to limit some of the political fallout and actually sit down and negotiate with the unions.

Nah, keep the boot on their throat. Nice....I like liberal termanology.


j-mac

 

[randel]

Nah, keep the boot on their throat. Nice....I like liberal termanology.


j-mac

his arse in a sling in less than a year....

 

[j-mac]

his arse in a sling in less than a year....

pfft, yeah right...You're talkin' out the wrong side of your neck.


j-mac

 

[buck]

Nothing more than tactical delays, while stealthily moving forward in districts for the signing of new contracts that would encompass the next two years.

Not even stealthily.

Wisconsin unions rush to get deals in place - U.S. news - Life - msnbc.com

School boards and local governments across Wisconsin are rushing to reach agreements with unions before a new law takes effect that will remove their ability to collectively bargain over nearly all issues other than minimal salary increases.

 

[danarhea]

Do you think that the people should not have the ability to redress the government?

Redress lives in Wisconsin? :mrgreen:

 

[danarhea]

You're dreaming. from your own article here:



Sour grapes dude. I guess the cowards shouldn't have skipped the state eh?


j-mac

He's a Republican. What else would you have expected him to say? That he was wrong? This is in the courts now.

 

[Tashah]

It looks like the die hard unions nuts and crybabies are desperately trying any sniveling tactic to over turn Wisconsin's anti-union laws.

Looks like the Wisconsin GOP union-busters will even violate Wisconsin law to please their corporate masters.

 

[maquiscat]

First of all what does the law say? After all if they gave enough notice and the Dems weren't in state to attend, then that's not a violation. Being open doesn't mean it can't happen if certain people are not there?

As to the unions agreeing to the cuts, they did that only after fighting it till the point that they saw they were going to lose. Only THEN did they try to make it look like they wanted to cooperate. Especially since they probably were planing to use the collective bargaining powers to restore the levels they currently have and are about to lose after a year or so when the dusts settles. The idea was to prevent the PUBLIC unions (private unions were nowhere in the bill) from increasing the bill to taxpayers again.

Mind you I think that all government positions, ESPECIALLY elected ones, need to be tied to the economy. If the economy goes up then their pay goes up. If it goes down, then their pay goes down. Makes a nice incentive to ensure the economy doesn't tank.

 

[Zyphlin]

Interesting to see what the Courts say on this. This move isn't surprising, nor unexpected, nor exactly telling. One partisan side takes an action, another partisan on the other side takes an action, and we're supposed to be making a big deal like either one means anything? Wake me when a judge rules.