In my time fighting the wrong at Whitehall City Hall, I have presented loads of information, that which primarily backs up my charges of moral corruption at City Hall, which includes abuse of power and ignoring civil rights to get done what they wish. My charges are bolstered by eye witnessing, paper trails, video, and putting it all together with logic using critical analysis to make this citizens case against what I feel is a systemically corrupt status quo. As one can imagine, this causes a lot of irritation and outrage amongst, not only those at City Hall, but their families, friends and supporters. I don’t make these charges lightly and I have backed them up with an exhaustive and singular dedication through all the connected dots I’ve proffered.
In this fight I have come up against several, let’s call them ‘angry bees’, furious that I would call out their beloved mayor/councilperson, etc. Some have understood the traditions of protest and free speech and respected the rules of engagement as far as argument is concerned. I do not profess to know all but what I do know, I am confident in. I am more than willing to discuss these important findings and matters with anyone of reasoned intelligence and learned capacities. Sadly, at least on social media, that is too often not what greets me in counterpoint. A lot of it is furious but shallow viewpoints hellbent, not on proving me wrong with educated opinion based on clear and reasoned evidence, but rather, to simply discredit my voice against those they have relations with, vested interests in or simply support at City Hall. Forget wrongdoing, forget ethical principles, forget adherence to traditional principles of right and justice and obligation to serving citizens in a reliably moral manner; what is more important here is seeing the reporter of that wrong being done by elected officials, silenced and defeated. This has been the motivation of some since day one. They want me most of all, to shut up.
The power structure of this tenacious beast at City Hall is stupendous. Why wouldn’t their fierceness in yielding it be just as stupendous? Vested interest and power-clutching and willful ignorance combined make for formidable fighters in the arena in which they fight. My arena, however, lies in truth, logical reasoning, learned opinion, critical analysis and a stalwart demand for their adherence to ethical principles in the citizen’s names they serve. And a healthy dose of brass balls. Let’s not forget those. Fighting in their arena, with their weapons (manipulation, misinformation, power juggernaut) without fighters amassed with me is a long slog to any kind of definable success (that which their supporters claim to be clueless about). However, in the arena I fight, success is guaranteed only so long as other citizens amass to fight with me, stand with me, in this just battle. Our small corner of America is worth the fight. That’s how I see it.
So then, we come to the reason for this post: an example of the sort of ‘spears’ thrown at me from various arms of the status quo, in this case a Maggard supporter livid with me and the fight I engage in.
For years, I treated the throwers of these ‘spears’ with the respect we owe our fellow man, using the rules of argument civilized society engages in. It finally became apparent with some however, that engaging in civilized, logical, reasoned argument, which included education on important matters and actually reading and comprehending this blog’s posts to inform their arguments, was something they weren’t really interested in. Theirs seemed to be a self-interested program bent only on muddying and deflecting and derailing conversation from the truth in order to silence the important information I was bringing forth, done so, I claim, as a means only to mitigate damage and bolster those whom they support. Their presentations, while always wrapped up in an illusion of ‘argument’, (meant to fool the uninformed into thinking they were reasonable people without vested interests who were making valid points) was merely to discredit the hard work I’ve done and continue to do. Here then is a perfect example of one of their most recent ‘spears’:
I think the entirety of this Blog suggests that I’ve ‘put up’.
Were it all only as simple as this person makes it out to be. This person, who is very vocal on Facebook pages, asserts that if I suggest that the Mayor and others are breaking laws and there is corruption at City Hall, that I should merely call the police, clearly not understanding how our processes work. That alone is the most delectable cherry on top of this sundae of forceful, confident ignorance.
A few years ago I sat down with former Chief of Police Richard Zitzke and had a conversation on several topics. Something said at that discussion surprised me. I said something about ‘law enforcement’ and he corrected me, telling me that, if memory serves me right, that, rather, they’re peace officers. Here is an excellent article on the difference:
As such, the “cops” aren’t there for every purpose. Generally its more for crimes like burglaries, spousal abuse, drug selling, traffic infractions, accidents, etc. In other words: keeping the peace. Corruption in government doesn’t generally fall under their purview.
(Ringing of phone…)
Hello. Police Dispatch.
Yes, my name is Gerald Dixon and I’d like to report corruption of city officials at City Hall.
Pardon me?
I believe that there is unethical immoral behavior on the parts of city hall officials which I would characterize as systemic moral political corruption and so I want the police to go and knock on their doors.
(click)
This person’s notion of how things work is, quite honestly, ignorant. Yet it doesn’t stop them from earnestly lambasting me with it, making me out to be the crank from the limited understanding of their argument. It’s the level of their anger directed at me borne out of this ignorance that compels me (reticently) to say this, and respond.
In trying to do the right things and change what is truly wrong here in Whitehall, this difficult task I’ve engaged in is made even more difficult to achieve because of the likes of people like this who pepper social media; not with reasoned, respectful argument based on educated opinions and personal critical analysis but rather, with strident ignorance and nonsensically uneducated opinions, making the community conversation forums akin to having tea and civilized conversation in a dense cloud of mayflies; it’s impossible.
It is not my interest or enjoyment to go around calling people ignorant but when they so foolishly swagger into the argument with such impotent (and ignorant) ‘weaponry’, they leave me no recourse in this fight for right other than to ‘parry’ where they have so foolishly ‘thrust’.
So, lets talk about this corruption that I’ve charged City Hall with which this person seems ‘confused’ about. (As if I haven’t made my case by now in over 100 blog posts…My responses to official definitions will be in red.)
I have consistently accused the Mayor and others at City Hall of abuse of the public trust, that which they’ve consistently ignored and undermined with their careless behavior and actions. The untrustworthy quid pro quo nature of their inter-support, the untrustworthy underhanded behavior in reaching and keeping power, the untrustworthy abuse of power to exert plans and schemes and rob people of the true value of their properties and the untrustworthy cavalier attitude towards civil rights, as reported on here:
and here:
and here:
A RIGHTFUL INDICTMENT OF YOUR REPRESENTATIVES ON WHITEHALL CITY COUNCIL.
and here:
and here:
and here:
and here:
THE PETTY TYRANNY OF WHITEHALL CODE ENFORCEMENT (PART FIVE) ***CITY COUNCIL EDITION***
Etcetera, etcetera, ad infinitum…. give compelling evidence to bolster the charges made.
- “In the American system of government, citizens cast votes for the candidate that they believe will most reliably accomplish the business of governance. This system implies a high amount of trust between elected officials and their constituents.
Any official that uses the power of an elected political office for personal gain or for a personal agenda is abusing the trust of that office. Such actions are considered political corruption.” * - “Legal and Moral Corruption
Corruption is derived from the Latin verb rumpere, to break. According to this approach, corruption is where the law is clearly broken (or moral standards of a community). This requires that all laws must be precisely stated, leaving no doubts about their meaning and no discretion to the public officials. A legal interpretation of corruption provides a clearly demarcated boundary between what is a corrupt activity and what is not. ‘If an official’s act is prohibited by laws established by the government, it is corrupt; if it is not prohibited, it is not corrupt even if it is abusive or unethical’. (John A. Gardiner, 1993. “Defining Corruption.” In: Corruption and Reform 7)”
As such then, if the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution, bolstered by the Supreme Court decision Camara v Municipal Court, warns against intrusion by government agents stepping onto private property without owner/occupant consent and/or a warrant signed by a judge, and code officers do so with neither, then, according to this article on corruption, the official in charge of this behavior (which is clearly prohibited by law), the mayor, is therefore corrupt.
“…An understanding of corruption from law perspective serves to underline a deterioration of self-regulated behaviour and a dependence on the legal approach to determine right from wrong.”
This self-regulated behavior which I claim has always been relied on as a social norm, i.e.- trustworthy behavior, ethical integrity, etc., because of the actions of some, must now be kept an eagle eye on. (I’m looking at you Whitehall officials)
“Morality is increasingly being legislated for in the absence of and a loss of faith in self regulated behaviour. (IMPORTANT!!!!): Although an act is committed within legal parameters it may lie outside moral boundaries. A corrupt act can be camouflaged by lawful justification.“ (Woodcliff, Woodcliff, Woodcliff) (D. Kaufmann, September 2006, Corruption, Governance and Security. In: World Economic Forum. Global Competitiveness Report 2004/2005.)
“From this perspective corruption encompasses undue influence over public policies, institutions, laws and regulations by vested private interests at the expense of the public interest. Cultural change, rather than legal change, may be necessary to impede corrupt behaviour. Non-corrupt actions may be within the letter of the law but do not account for the spirit of the law.
Above taken from Elaine Byrne, 2007. The Moral and Legal Development of Corruption: Nineteeth and Twentieth Century Corruption in Ireland. PhD Thesis, University of Limerick**
So, to answer their ‘spear’, not every corruption is illegal and sometimes it is a change by the public that’s necessary to stop the corrupt behavior, neither of which are under the purview of the ‘cops’. THAT is why the ‘cops’ have never been called and why I’ve used whatever means available to me; this blog, social media, to excite the change needed from the citizens to impede the corrupt behavior for our community. Is that clear?
As stated above, “Although an act is committed within legal parameters it may lie outside moral boundaries. A corrupt act can be camouflaged by lawful justification.” Not everything that is done is done illegally but, the spirit of law is not always so cut and dried. Having a plan for the land Woodcliff sits on and then using the city’s processes to undermine it and make it viable for the city’s acquisition, while perhaps remaining in the boundaries of the law, is corrupt practice, in particular moral and political. I say our government’s processes are not there to take advantage of for their schemes and plans, particularly in an immoral way, as was the case with Woodcliff.
This is a piece in Wikipedia on political corruption. It is a list of actions/behaviors they say are ripe for corruption (Let’s see how many pertain to Whitehall. I included Wikipedia’s whole list so you could see what pertained and didn’t pertain to Whitehall):***
It is argued that the following conditions are favorable for corruption:
Information deficits
(As far as information deficits, they’ll tell you what polishes their reputations in the public eye but leave out a lot of things which, unless you’re keeping an eagle eye on everything (like me), could hurt their reputations.)
•Lacking freedom of information legislation. In contrast, for example: The Indian Right to Information Act 2005 is perceived to have “already engendered mass movements in the country that is bringing the lethargic, often corrupt bureaucracy to its knees and changing power equations completely.”[35]
√•Lack of investigative reporting in the local media.[36] (With the exception of myself, nobody in our Central Ohio media investigate anything in Whitehall’s governance. The Whitehall News certainly doesn’t hold the mayor or any other elected leader’s feet to the fire. It seems nobody else cares about deeper issues within city hall. Mayor Maggard has gotten off scott-free in her administration’s governance from the wider media outlets and most certainly the vast majority of the too-trusting public who’ve given her little scrutiny.)
√•Contempt for or negligence of exercising freedom of speech and freedom of the press. (A few years ago they instituted a ‘poll public card’ that you had to fill out in order to speak, essentially putting up an intimidating roadblock to speaking which is already intimidating enough for people. While they have since rescinded its use, the president of council tends to waver in the time allotments given based on who is going to speak or what they’re speaking on or what he wants, or not, said aloud in public.)
•Weak accounting practices, including lack of timely financial management.
åLack of measurement of corruption. For example, using regular surveys of households and businesses in order to quantify the degree of perception of corruption in different parts of a nation or in different government institutions may increase awareness of corruption and create pressure to combat it. This will also enable an evaluation of the officials who are fighting corruption and the methods. (Just recently, they did a survey which asked a lot of questions which skirted these issues because if you ask the question of corruption, that suggests there may be some.)
•Tax havens which tax their own citizens and companies but not those from other nations and refuse to disclose information necessary for foreign taxation. This enables large-scale political corruption in the foreign nations.[37][citation needed]
Lacking control of the government.
åLacking civic society and non-governmental organizations which monitor the government. (There is no specific group with this important task acting as a government watchdog entity.)
√•An individual voter may have a rational ignorance regarding politics, especially in nationwide elections, since each vote has little weight. (I have heard and read from too many citizens their dislike and lack of information in regard to ‘politics’.)
•Weak civil service, and slow pace of reform.
•Weak rule of law.
•Weak legal profession.
√•Weak judicial independence. (While one may not receive the most fair treatment from a Mayor’s Court (The mayor compels code officers who go out and write notices which compel people into (here its called Magistrate’s Court) court to stand before a person the Mayor appointed who decides your fate) it is doubly disconcerting and questioning of the court’s independence for justice’s sake when the magistrate appointed has donated to the Mayor’s campaign. See below)
•Lacking protection of whistleblowers.
•Lack of benchmarking, that is continual detailed evaluation of procedures and comparison to others who do similar things, in the same government or others, in particular comparison to those who do the best work. The Peruvian organization Ciudadanos al Dia has started to measure and compare transparency, costs, and efficiency in different government departments in Peru. It annually awards the best practices which has received widespread media attention. This has created competition among government agencies in order to improve.[38]
•Individual officials routinely handle cash, instead of handling payments by giro or on a separate cash desk – illegitimate withdrawals from supervised bank accounts are much more difficult to conceal.
•Public funds are centralized rather than distributed. For example, if $1,000 is embezzled from a local agency that has $2,000 funds, it is easier to notice than from a national agency with $2,000,000 funds. See the principle of subsidiarity.
√•Large, unsupervised public investments. (If there are entities supervising things like the purchase of the Commons at Royal Landing and the strip shopping center on Hamilton Road and the Woodcliff purchase and distribution, I’m not aware.)
•Pay disproportionately lower than that of the average citizen.
•Government licenses needed to conduct business, e.g., import licenses, encourage bribing and kickbacks.
åLong-time work in the same position may create relationships inside and outside the government which encourage and help conceal corruption and favoritism. Rotating government officials to different positions and geographic areas may help prevent this; for instance certain high rank officials in French government services (e.g. treasurer-paymasters general) must rotate every few years.
åCostly political campaigns, with expenses exceeding normal sources of political funding, especially when funded with taxpayer money.
(2011 Mayoral race: Kim Maggard- $7182, Chris Parkevich- $225: Outspent him by almost 32 to 1.
2015 Mayoral race: Kim Maggard- $21,724, Leslie LaCorte- $8735. Outspent her by almost 3 to 1.
2018 3rd Term extension vote: Yes to extend terms- $39,600, No to keep 2 terms- $1595 Pro term limit extension committee outspent the other by almost 25 to 1.)
Someone doesn’t just want Kim Maggard in office, they need her in office.
•A single group or family controlling most of the key government offices. Lack of laws forbidding and limiting number of members of the same family to be in office .
•Less interaction with officials reduces the opportunities for corruption. For example, using the Internet for sending in required information, like applications and tax forms, and then processing this with automated computer systems. This may also speed up the processing and reduce unintentional human errors. See e-Government.
•A windfall from exporting abundant natural resources may encourage corruption.[39] (See Resource curse)
•War and other forms of conflict correlate with a breakdown of public security.
Social conditions
√•Self-interested closed cliques and “old boy networks”. (This one is HUGE in Whitehall and everyone knows it. It is a cancer on our form of government and on our community. The way to get into it though is be their friend, give them campaign donations and kiss a lot of figurative ass.)
åFamily-, and clan-centered social structure, with a tradition of nepotism/favouritism being acceptable.
•A gift economy, such as the Soviet blat system, emerges in a Communist centrally planned economy.
√•Lacking literacy and education among the population. (The level of literacy or education among the population is a thing unto itself (see above ‘spear’). Those in City Hall take advantage of whatever does exist for their own benefit.)
•Frequent discrimination and bullying among the population.
åTribal solidarity, giving benefits to certain ethnic groups. In India for example, the political system, it has become common that the leadership of national and regional parties are passed from generation to generation.[40][41]
creating a system in which a family holds the center of power. Some examples are most of the Dravidian parties of south India and also the Congress party, which is one of the two major political parties in India. (While what goes on here in Whitehall is not the same as this article characterizes this aspect, this ‘Team’ at City Hall acts in solidarity amongst each other. I blame Mayor Maggard of stocking this ‘tribe’ for her own ultimate benefit.)
•Lack of strong laws which forbid members of the same family to contest elections and be in office as in India where local elections are often contested between members of the same powerful family by standing in opposite parties so that whoever is elected that particular family is at tremendous benefit.
So, 13 of the 32 benchmarks used to suggest corruption in government are apparent in Whitehall City Hall. Two…even five to eight might be understandable but thirteen?! The signs, the proof of corruption are everywhere through City Hall. It is clear, in light of all that I’ve presented, that the person who wrote the Facebook post and others like it, (and their ilk) simply has a vendetta against me because I won’t suffer their foolishness against the seriousness of that which I charge those whom they support. I suggest they suspend this false apoplectic rage used for the ultimate benefit of the ‘Team’ in City Hall and instead turn their attention to supporting the US Constitution and ethical principles of elected officials in office. As for me, I always thought those two things were where citizens allegiances were supposed to lie.
Finally, a note on my purported ‘sour grapes’ over losing two elections, I will say this: five years before I ever ran for office, I stood up on our street corners and at City Hall and made clear what my efforts were about; calling out corruption and wrongdoing at City Hall. I did it long before I ever ran and I have consistently done it after my failures to achieve office. My efforts in righting wrongs in Whitehall’s governance has never been about personal gains or failures but about what is right. Read through my blogposts; the themes, the pleading for the right thing being done in the citizen’s names, that has never waivered or changed, nor will it ever. I believe wholeheartedly in the virtue of my fight, how else could one individual have fought an entire city hall for as long as I have? It is for justice, coupled with my spirit of tenacity and purpose that drive me. Ultimately, I give a damn about people and the community of Whitehall itself. I’d always been under the impression that it was the obligation of all of us to give a damn. Call me crazy.
2011, four years before I ever ran for office
2012: This is me not ‘having a life’, as my efforts have been characterized. Spending it instead on the defense of my country’s tenets.
*https://www.houstoncrimedefense.com/blog/4-types-of-political-corruption/
**http://elaine.ie/2009/07/31/definitions-and-types-of-corruption/
***https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_corruption
Whitehall Watchblog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.