Letters to the Editor

Dear editor, Football players are flagged when they break the rules.  We expect referees to call games fairly.  Fair is fair, that’s just the way it should be – shouldn’t it?  A majority of Wisconsin citizens, by passing resolutions and referendums calling for nonpartisan redistricting, demanded that our government be defined by fair voting districts.  Nearly 75 percent of Wisconsin voters - Republicans, Democrats, and Independents – said they want political bias removed from redistricting, regardless of whether it costs their party seats. This is a testament to the fairmindedness of Wisconsin people who expect the game to be played fairly.  So why do our Republican Legislators believe they can break the rules and have no obligation to abide by the will of their constituents?  They say there is no problem with their maps because they are legal. However, legal is not the issue here, fairness and respecting the will of the majority is the issue.    The fact is, independent reports indicate that partisan gerrymandering is extreme in the maps proposed by legislative Republicans.  This means that those voting districts were created so that they purposely dilute the voice of voters. Throw the flag, ref!   If we can’t trust our Republican representatives to listen to the majority on this issue, what makes us think they have any interest in any of our wishes or needs?  Many of them have been elected multiple times and seem confident that there are no consequences for defying our will. It is time to throw them out of the game and replace them with Representatives who will commit themselves – and prove – that they will serve the collective will of those who elect them.   Fairness in voting is the greatest strength of democracy.  When we vote we are adding our voice to that of our fellow citizens.  When our votes form a majority, our Representatives are obligated to act in accordance with that demand. Gerrymandering cheats people out of the power of their vote.   Wisconsinites believe in fair play, and we should demand it of our politicians and expect it from our Wisconsin Supreme Court. Fair maps is fair play.  William Cary Richland Center   Dear editor, I write to you as a concerned citizen. I am a newer member of the Village of Spring Green Plan Commission. At our January 19 meeting, we were tasked by Sauk County Circuit Court Judge Screnock with creating a conditional use permit (CUP) for the Kane dog operation on Pearl Road. We held a public hearing on the matter and began to develop a CUP. As I understand it at this point, it is the commission’s responsibility to create a set of conditions that assure that the operation is run with concern for the interests of the neighbors and the community. I respect that process. At our February 16 meeting, we will likely vote on a CUP, and the Kane’s business will operate under those conditions going forward. I wanted to communicate my intention to abstain from this vote. In abstaining, I will mean no disrespect to my more experienced colleagues on the commission who have worked hard on this matter for some time. And I understand that there is no immediate alternative at this point but to put such a CUP in place. My abstention will be made to protest Judge Screnock’s decision. His remand of the Plan Commission’s July 17, 2019, vote against offering the Kane’s a CUP is a local example of the democratic process being undermined by use of the courts. The Village of Spring Green addressed the Kane’s proposal for a dog operation back in 2019. I retired in Spring Green at the time that this democratic process was unfolding. I watched as differing viewpoints were shared at public meetings and in the media. This is the way democracy works. Citizens give a matter of public concern due diligence and the representative body charged with the matter makes an informed vote. In the case of the Kane’s CUP, the Plan Commission decided in a 4-3 vote not to offer them one.  The Kanes appealed this decision and won in court. Some would argue that this is the way things work in a democracy. I would say, wait a minute, let’s think about this. The way I see it, the courts should be a last resort in such matters. If the democratic process is flawed, I understand why one would resort to the courts. As I see it, this was not the case in the Kane decision. I think we must ask ourselves, are we willing to tolerate this? Isn’t this part of an unacceptable pattern of legal behavior in our democracy? Yes, the decision rendered by the judge is legal, but is it fair to the people of Spring Green? Is it a fair expression of our democracy?   Sincerely, Patrick Hagen  Member Village of Spring Green Plan Commission