According to this article in the South Bend Tribune, there appears to be a major chasm between the St. Joseph County Commissioners and the County Assessor:
The rift between the County Commissioners and the county assessor has widened from crack to chasm.
County Assessor David Wesolowski, stung by comments made by Commissioner Steve Ross, including an insinuation that Wesolowski should resign, has hired a private attorney.
The attorney, Lyn Leone, sent a letter to the commissioners informing them that, henceforth, any meetings with Wesolowski will require an advance written agenda, with a copy to be sent to her “as a courtesy.”
According to the letter, Wesolowski needs an advance agenda because “he wants to be in a position to properly prepare for each such meeting.”
. . .
The roots of the conflict are buried deeply in property tax assessment changes that led to many area residents receiving major increases in late 2003.
Those tax bills generated some 8,000 appeals that immediately clogged, and are still clogging, the mechanism of local government.
Thousands of residents who won appeals are still waiting for their refunds and will likely wait a good deal longer.
Ross said he found it “most disturbing” that Wesolowski failed to attend a meeting with township assessors “to iron out issues” regarding the assessment process.
“That’s the problem with Dave,” Ross said, adding that “when things get tough,” Wesolowski tends to withdraw rather than resolve the issues.
Commissioner Cindy Bodle, D-District 3, expressed surprise that Wesolowski feels he needs an attorney, but said she was also surprised and disappointed with the way “a commissioner” contacted Wesolowski while he was on vacation and demanded that he come in for a meeting.
“A commissioner” was, of course, a reference to Ross, but Bodle was too polite to say it until she was pressed to say who she meant.
. . .
When county officials start talking to each other through attorneys, that’s a problem. For one thing, when you’re communicating through a third-party or even in writing, it’s easier to ignore civility and get taken up in your own sense of righteousness. When you’re forced to sit down and talk face to face with someone, you’re more likely to behave civilly; not let the rhetoric get out of hand, and approach problems in a spirit of compromise. (Take it from me, I certainly deliver critiques here in a manner I would be entirely unlikely to do if I were talking to the subject of the critique in person. I’ve also experienced an escalation of rhetoric in an exchange of letters which was rapidly diffused when I simply picked up a phone and called the other person to discuss the matter.)
Leave a Reply