{"id":1079,"date":"2016-03-18T08:29:48","date_gmt":"2016-03-18T13:29:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/truthinaddison.com\/?page_id=1079"},"modified":"2016-03-18T08:30:09","modified_gmt":"2016-03-18T13:30:09","slug":"will-we-hear-the-other-side-of-the-kanter-story","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"http:\/\/truthinaddison.com\/?page_id=1079","title":{"rendered":"Will We Hear the Other Side of the Kanter Story?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Will We Hear the Other Side of the Kanter Story?
\n<\/strong>By Susan M. Halpern
\n<\/strong>Former Addison Councilmember (1992-1999)<\/strong><\/h3>\n

It will be interesting to see whether Addison will truly allow us to see the other side of the Kanter story. Addison has now agreed to release unspecified documents, although when is unknown.\u00a0 More about that in a minute.\u00a0 In the meantime, I found some information on Addison\u2019s website.<\/p>\n

One of the things I found was Kanter\u2019s almost-two-year-old July 11, 2014 letter. It contained observations, recommendations and staff\u2019s responses.\u00a0 The information in this letter was almost identical to what you heard in Kanter\u2019s inflammatory presentation on February 23, 2016.\u00a0 We\u2019ve said it before: Kanter\u2019s presentation was OLD NEWS.\u00a0 It\u2019s very obvious: Kanter was trotted back out to be the springboard for the reelection campaign Meier is orchestrating, trying desperately to make his cadre look good by attacking Addison\u2019s past and its former staff and management.\u00a0 So Kanter added lots of inflammatory innuendos and recycled the same things he talked about almost two years ago, confirming his willingness to put Meier\u2019s ambitions above Addison\u2019s best interests.\u00a0 No one watching this debacle can believe for one minute that Kanter is objective, impartial or intellectually honest, all standards required by the AICPA.<\/p>\n

Now, don\u2019t get me wrong, almost two years ago, Kanter identified systems that needed tightening. But what we didn\u2019t hear on February 23, 2014 is that Addison\u2019s staff has been working on improving things for almost two years, including by coordinating with the consultants at Gradient Solutions.\u00a0 And we sure didn\u2019t hear that more than two years ago, before Kanter ever showed up, Addison was already in the process of replacing its court system.\u00a0 These efforts were spearheaded by Addison\u2019s former management, the very people Kanter shamefully attacked in in his presentation.\u00a0 And, amidst all the irresponsible and inflammatory innuendo, let\u2019s be very clear: Kanter hasn\u2019t found one dollar missing.<\/p>\n

So why dredge up two-year-old issues, without even acknowledging the work done by Addison\u2019s employees and Gradient to improve Addison\u2019s controls? The election, of course. Meier later confirmed it in Addison\u2019s newsletter, where he unveiled his clever \u201cpast\/present\u201d campaign strategy. It was all a political hit.\u00a0 And that makes clear that with this group, personal ambition is paramount, even if it results in harm to Addison.<\/p>\n

The theater of it all was remarkable. All but two of the seven councilmembers had heard Kanter\u2019s pitch a long time ago, but they acted surprised and we heard lots of \u201ctut tuts.\u201d\u00a0 Mary Carpenter was even quoted in the Dallas Morning News as being \u201cspeechless.\u201d Why, because Kanter rehashed old news in an inflammatory way for no valid or constructive reason?\u00a0 I\u2019m with you on that one.\u00a0 I\u2019m speechless too at the thought that Addison\u2019s mayor orchestrated bad publicity for Addison.\u00a0 Whatever happened to the fiduciary obligations all these people have to our town?<\/p>\n

And that brings us to my Open Records Act request. After watching Kanter\u2019s inflammatory presentation, I requested records that would reveal the views of prior management that have been so conspicuously omitted from this \u201cnew\u201d dialog. I asked for their communications with Kanter and Kanter\u2019s billing statements, which should contain narratives of his work. I also asked for emails exchanged between Kanter and any member of the council.\u00a0 Given my suspicions about the orchestrated nature of Kanter\u2019s reprocessed presentation, I want to find out which councilmembers have been communicating with Kanter directly, out of the public\u2019s view.\u00a0 You know, transparency<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Addison again refused to produce a single document. In its lengthy submission to the AG, Addison cited the \u201caudit\u201d exception, the attorney-client privilege, and the \u201cagency memoranda\u201d exception.\u00a0 Well, we know Kanter\u2019s not a lawyer, and his agreement expressly says his work isn\u2019t an audit:<\/p>\n

This engagement does not involve an audit<\/u>, review, compilation or attest service as that term is defined by the AICPA.<\/p>\n

I responded with my own letter to the AG. Among other things, I pointed out that if Addison believed that communications between Kanter and prior management and staff (or the council) enjoyed some type of privilege, then the Town should have preserved that privilege.\u00a0 But they didn\u2019t.\u00a0 The entire matter has been openly discussed, including with the press. If Addison ever had a privilege, these politically motivated people waived it. \u00a0\u00a0I also expressed my concern that without these documents, Meier and Kanter could create whatever \u201creality\u201d they wanted to create, without fear of being called on the carpet because Addison is hiding the rest of the story.<\/p>\n

I sent my letter off to the AG, faxed it to the lawyer, and went back to work. Later in the day, as I was preparing the original version of this post, I received a call from Addison\u2019s management indicating that they would<\/em> be producing documents.\u00a0 Today, I received a voicemail from the City Secretary stating that Addison would be withdrawing its AG submission and would be producing the documents.\u00a0 But, I was told it would take time\u2026<\/p>\n

I\u2019m skeptical, but hopeful that I will get full disclosure. Citizens must be permitted to examine the underlying information \u2013 the facts \u2013 that either confirm or disprove the public statements of government and politicians.\u00a0 That is what \u201ctransparency\u201d is all about.<\/p>\n

But to work \u2013 to have true transparency \u2013 the process has to be a whole lot more accessible than what we\u2019ve experienced in trying to get to the bottom of the Kanter fiasco. A process that is this laborious and expensive is not \u201ctransparent.\u201d It discourages citizens from trying in the first place.\u00a0 And that opens the door for politicians to feed their conclusions to the public, knowing that most citizens will be unlikely \u2013 or unable \u2013 to obtain information necessary to expose distortions or outright fabrications.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s not \u201ctransparency\u201d folks, and we\u2019ve lived under these rules for long enough. It\u2019s time for a change, and we\u2019re hoping it starts with FULL disclosure regarding the Kanter documents.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n