August 29, 2025, | Vol. 1, Issue 26 (Approx. 1992 words – a twelve-minute read)
What’s Ahead? — When Conscience Collides with Power.”
A resignation letter, a flawed framework, and the blueprint for civic renewal
—————————————————————————————————————-
🗣️ Commentary: Speaking of Moral Imperatives
Hypothetically Speaking: A Memo, A Moment, A Choice
Janesville — Imagine receiving a memo from a municipal executive—timed just before a key vote—reminding you not of your legal duties, but of your expected allegiance. Not to the law. Not to the taxpayers. But to the appointing authority.
The implication is unmistakable: dissent is disloyalty, and loyalty means compliance.
Now imagine you are not just a citizen, but a statutorily appointed member of a Joint Review Board (JRB), tasked under Wisconsin law with evaluating the merits of a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) amendment. Your duty is not to rubber-stamp a proposal. Your duty is to weigh its impact, its legality, its fiscal prudence, and its alignment with the public interest.
The statutes do not say “follow the City’s position.” They say “review,” “evaluate,” “vote.”
So, what do you do when a memo arrives that subtly suggests your independent judgment is off course? That your public commentary—rooted in transparency and civic engagement—is somehow a breach of loyalty? Do you nod quietly and fall in line? Or do you remember who you actually work for?
This is not hypothetical. This is a moral crossroads.
———————————–
Here is the memo in question:
| Lahner, Kevin | Aug 26, 2025, 9:19 PM (13 hours ago) | ||
| to me, Jimsi | |||
Rich:
I’ve been informed that you have posted and/or talked about the upcoming JRB meeting tomorrow. Some have construed those comments as potentially disapproving of the City’s intent with the project plan amendment we are bringing forward. As you know, you serve as the City’s representative on the board, and as such our expectation is that you will be supporting the City’s position. As always, if you have any questions or concerns regarding the amendment, please speak to Jimsi regarding our intent to ensure that we are on the same page prior to the meeting.
Thanks,
Kevin M. Lahner
City Manager
City of Janesville
608.755.3177
Pronouns: he/him
Why pronouns? Learn More
———————————————————————
Let us be clear: the expectation that a board member “support the City’s position” is not just inappropriate—it is antithetical to the very purpose of the board. The statutes do not grant the appointing authority a veto over conscience. They do not empower the City Manager to dictate votes. They empower citizens to deliberate, to question, and to decide.
When pressure to conform arrives cloaked in collegial language, it is all the more dangerous—because it asks you to betray your duty in the name of unity.
So, we ask you, our readers: when the moment comes, do you follow the whisper of political
pressure? Or do you stand firm in your obligation to the law, to the taxpayers, and to the truth?
Hypothetically Speaking:
Imagine it is time to cast your ballot. Have you decided what is the right course of action? Not just on our website. But in your own civic life. Because democracy depends not on obedience—but on integrity. What is your choice? This is your moral crossroads.
Civics Education Corner: 🏛️ Legal Role of the Joint Review Board (JRB) in Wisconsin
Under Wisconsin Statute § 66.1105, the Joint Review Board (JRB) is a statutory body established to oversee the creation, amendment, and annual review of Tax Incremental Districts (TIDs). Its purpose is to ensure that proposed TID actions are fiscally sound, legally compliant, and serve the public interest.
📋 Composition of the JRB
The board consists of:
• One representative from each overlying taxing authority:
- The municipality
- The county
- The school district
- The technical college district
- One public member, selected by the other representatives.
⚖️ Legal Duties and Voting Obligations
JRB members are not beholden to the appointing authority. Their legal obligations include:
• Independent Evaluation: Members must assess whether the TID or amendment meets statutory criteria, including the “but for” test—i.e., whether the development would not occur without TIF assistance.
• Fiduciary Responsibility: Members represent the interests of their taxing authority and the broader public, not the political interests of the municipality.
• Due Diligence: Members are expected to review project plans, financial projections, and public testimony before casting a vote.
• Annual Review: The JRB must meet annually to review the performance and compliance of active TIDs.
🗳️ Voting Authority
• The JRB has the power to approve or deny the creation or amendment of a TID.
• A majority vote is required for approval.
• If the JRB rejects a proposal, it must provide a written explanation to the municipality.
In short, the JRB is not a ceremonial rubber stamp. It is a legal safeguard designed to protect taxpayers from speculative or unsound redevelopment schemes. Members are bound by statute—not by loyalty to any individual or office.
You can find more detailed guidance in the Wisconsin Department of Revenue’s TIF Manual and the official statute § 66.1105.
————————————————–
⚖️ Why This Matters
The JRB exists to protect the public from speculative or poorly justified development. Its members are not beholden to the City Manager, Mayor, or any appointing authority. They are bound by state statutes, administrative rules, and their duty to the public.
When pressure is applied to “stay in line,” it is not just inappropriate—it is a threat to democratic process.
———————————————————————————-
All Is Not Lost: A Call for the Council to Correct Course
Janesville has always been a city that finds a way forward. When factories closed, we adapted. When challenges mounted, we pulled together. That same spirit must guide us now in the wake of the City Council’s 5–2 vote establishing the new process for advisory committee appointments.
The vote was real, and the structure is now in place. But let us be clear: all is not lost. The Council still has the power—and the responsibility—to correct their course, to strengthen the framework, and to demonstrate that citizen trust matters as much as efficiency.
Why Advisory Committees Matter
“Advisory committees are not minor housekeeping bodies. They are the working engines of local democracy.”
Advisory committees review development proposals, debate housing policy, weigh in on public safety, and help guide economic priorities. Their recommendations influence budgets, ordinances, and long-term strategies that affect every household in Janesville.
That is why the way appointments are made matters so deeply. If the process is too closed, if merit and qualifications are not at the center, committees risk becoming political ornaments rather than true public forums.
The Decision, and the Opportunity
Yes, the Council’s decision was a setback. The new framework does not go far enough to guarantee merit-based appointments, full transparency, or open citizen participation. And yes, the City Manager will soon bring forward his list of appointees.
But that does not mean the outcome is set in stone. Council members can—and should—improve the framework they just approved by adding safeguards, clarifications, and expectations that restore balance.
It is important to recognize that the Council President deserves credit for advocating the inclusion of additional citizen representation in the structure. That step was significant, and it demonstrates that responsiveness to public input is possible. Yet he, along with the full Council, can go much farther showing the community that citizen participation and professional seriousness are not mutually exclusive but, in fact, essential partners in building committees that are both credible and effective.
Citizen Expert Advisory Panels & Deliberative Democracy
Hypothetically Speaking has long proposed the use of Citizen Expert Advisory Panels (CEAPs) and the principles of deliberative democracy as the gold standard for building advisory committees that are representative, thoughtful, and impactful. CEAPs combine the lived experience of residents with the technical expertise of professionals assuring that decisions are neither elitist nor uninformed but balanced and grounded in both real-world needs and expert guidance.
Deliberative democracy goes further, insisting that committees engage in structured dialogue, reasoned debate, and transparent decision-making rather than closed-door compromises. If adopted, these principles would transform advisory committees from perfunctory bodies into trusted community forums capable of tackling housing, development, environment, and public safety challenges with seriousness of purpose and broad legitimacy.
“The test of our committees is not how quickly they meet, but how deeply they deliberate.”
How to Correct the Course
The way forward is practical, achievable, and rooted in good governance traditions:
- Publish qualifications. Each appointee should provide a public statement of background, expertise, and conflicts of interest.
- Apply CEAP principles. Blend citizen voices and expert knowledge to create balanced, high-quality recommendations.
- Ensure open meetings. Livestream, record, and open every meeting to public comment.
- Require deliberative methods. Encourage structured dialogue, not just token discussion.
- Require annual reporting. Plain-language reports from each committee on decisions and recommendations.
- Adopt an ethical pledge. Committees must affirm service to the public interest above politics.
- Commit to regular review. Council evaluation every three years for effectiveness.
“Citizens should expect more. Council members should demand more.”
Hypothetically Speaking: We are at a Crossroads. A Moral Imperative.
The Council’s vote may have set the rules, but it did not close the door on accountability. Together, this community can turn a flawed beginning into a stronger system that reflects Janesville’s best traditions of fairness and civic participation.
All is not lost. The work of restoring trust begins now—with the deliberate application of Citizen Expert Advisory Panels and the proven principles of deliberative democracy.
Sidebar: Action Steps for Citizens
✔ Attend Meetings. Show up—online or in person. Your presence matters.
✔ Ask Questions. Demand to know qualifications and backgrounds of appointees.
✔ Speak Out. Use public comment periods to raise concerns and offer ideas.
✔ Stay Engaged. Follow up with council members directly; let them know you are watching.
🗞️ Hypothetically Speaking
“Resignation Is Not Retreat: A Blueprint for Reform”
This week, I resigned from the Joint Review Board. This week, I offer a proposal—not just for healing, but for structural reform.
Resignation, in this case, was not an act of withdrawal. It was a refusal to normalize coercion. It was a line drawn in defense of statutory duty and democratic integrity. But if we stop at protest, we miss the moment. So, let us build.
Here are five reforms that could restore trust, independence, and lawful governance to Janesville’s boards and commissions:
1. Statutory Orientation for All Appointees
Before any board member takes their seat, they should receive a clear, public-facing orientation on their statutory role. Not just a packet—but a session that outlines fiduciary duty, independence, and the limits of executive influence. Let us codify this.
2. Independent Appointment Mechanism
Boards like the Joint Review Board should not be populated solely by executive appointment. We need a hybrid model—one that includes nominations from civic institutions, peer boards, and even public lotteries. Independence begins with how we choose who serves.
3. Public Deliberation Mandate
No more silent votes. Every board should be required to deliberate publicly before any major decision. Let the record reflect not just outcomes, but reasoning. Let dissent be heard—not punished.
4. Civic Education Partnership
Let us partner with schools, libraries, and media outlets to create ongoing civic education around board service. What do these bodies do? Who serves? How can residents engage? Transparency is not just a virtue—it is a strategy.
5. Oversight and Ethics Review
We need a standing committee—independent of the City Manager’s office—to review board conduct, appointment practices, and potential conflicts of interest. Let it be composed of retired judges, educators, and civic leaders. Let it report publicly.
Commentary:
These proposals are not radical. They are restorative. They do not seek to dismantle governance—they seek to dignify it. And they are not mine alone. They belong to every resident who has watched a board meeting and wondered, “Who are they really serving?”
I invite feedback. I invite critique. I invite collaboration.
Because resignation is not retreat. It is a call to rebuild.
—Richard Gruber
Subscribe to Hypothetically Speaking for insight at the intersection of policy, people, and possibility. Substack.com key words Rock County Civics Academy
New columns every Friday from Wisconsin’s heartland to America’s horizon.
☕ Community Spotlight: Havana Coffee
Fueling Dialogue, One Cup at a Time
Looking for a space to connect and reflect? Visit Havana Coffee at 1250 Milton Avenue true Janesville gem where civic energy meets excellent espresso. With hearty food, warm service, and a strong commitment to local journalism, Havana Coffee proudly supports the Rock County Civics Academy and all who believe in informed engagement.
Welcome our newest sponsor, Nowlan Law Firm and Attorney Tim Lindau. Thank you for sharing our vision for the future with your support today.
We deeply appreciate the support and encouragement from Tim at Nowlan, Daniela at Havana and many others who ask with us:
———————————————————————————————————–
💭 Hypothetically Speaking…
- What if transparency was standard in local government?
- What if civic engagement became Rock County’s defining strength?
That is the mission of Hypothetically Speaking. And with your voice in the mix, it is closer to reality than ever.
💬 A Call to Leadership
Every advancement in our community begins with someone choosing to act. If you have asked yourself when the right time to get involved is—the answer might just be now.
Ways to contribute:
• Volunteer with a civic group
• Apply to serve on a local board or commission
• Run for public office and lead the change.
“If not me, who? If not now, when? — Hillel the Elder
🌐 Stay Engaged with the Rock County Civics Academy
📍 [Visit Our Website] rockcountycivicsacademy.org
📘 [Follow us on Facebook]
📺 [Subscribe on YouTube]
📰 [Join Our Substack Newsletter] Substack.com Key words: Rock County Civics Academy
Until next time—stay curious, stay engaged, and stay connected.
©2025 Rock County Civics Academy – All Rights Reserved.
No responses yet