- John

If an organized approach to economic development is important to the County Board, I wish you would conduct it in an open, accountable fashion. Sadly, the County's contract with the Jefferson Development Corporation has become a farce. The JCEDC has repeatedly refused to hand over the deliverables in its contract with you, yet they continue to receive funding.

Tonight you'll hear the JCEDC's annual report. You won't be told what I'm going to say. Instead, you'll hear lots of happy news. You won't be able to double-check what you've heard, because the JCEDC operates behind closed doors and won't supply any documentation to back up what it's saying.

Last January, the County Board made a contract with the JCEDC. For the first time, there was a written record of what the County expected in return for its $71,000.

The portion of the contract with these deliverables was written by the JCEDC, so they knew what was in it, and you approved it. Thank you for creating that contract. With the signing of the contract, the JCEDC received the first one-fourth of that money.

On April 19, 2001 I made an open records request to County Administrator Bill Hausen to see the many documents listed as the deliverables in the JCEDC's contract with the County. orporation Counsel Phil Ristow believed my request was valid, and Hausen relayed the request to the JCEDC.

On April 30, the Budget Committee heard the first quarterly report from the JCEDC. They never mentioned the records request and their intent to refuse to hand over anything at all. They got their next quarter's money without debate.

As it turned out, the JCEDC had hired Milwaukee attorneys to prepare their refusal. On May 3, their attorney - who was paid with some of this $71,000 - responded to Ristow and refused to supply anything beyond these oral reports to the County Board. His argument was ridiculous in the extreme. He tried to claim the contract didn't really mean what it said.

On May 29, Ristow pointed out the absurdities of his response, and again asked the JCEDC to supply the records. He reaffirmed that in his legal opinion, it seemed clear that this was a legitimate request, and that the JCEDC should explain, item by item, why it would or would not hand over the records described in the contract. He asked that they respond by June 11. They waited until June 26. Again they refused to hand over any of the deliverables, and they never supplied the point-by-point explanation he requested.

Then the Budget Committee threatened to withhold funding unless there was a better explanation. On July 17, the JCEDC Executive Committee met with Ristow and Hausen to resolve this conflict. After that meeting, the JCEDC responded in a letter, saying "As we discussed this morning, the JCEDC plans to comply with the intent and spirit of the contract between the JCEDC and the County." They gave the impression they'd reversed their position and intended to hand over the contracted items. However, the letter went on to ignore Ristow's request for an explanation of each item. In one case, the request was for items 1 through 11. The JCEDC responded only to items 1, 3, 7, 8 and 11, ignoring the request for items 2, 4, 5, 9 and 10.

On July 26, Ristow repeated his request for a point-by-point explanation. On July 31, before the JCEDC ever responded, the Budget Committee gave the JCEDC their money for another quarter.

On August 17, JCEDC president Sheldon Mielke wrote to Ristow, again refusing to hand over the items in the contract, as well as refusing to give a point-by-point explanation. The reversal was short-lived. It was all a bluff in order to insure they received funding at the end of July.

I hope the County Board will take a lesson from the City of Jefferson. The City recently disbanded its two industrial development organizations, the Commerce and Industry Association and the Jefferson Development Corporation. They dismissed the Executive Director and formed a new City commission to oversee development efforts. The City's leaders decided that closed-door meetings, a lack of concrete accomplishment, and meddling in public affairs without public oversight was the wrong way to do economic development.

Since 1995, the JCEDC has received more than $500,000 in funding from the County and its municipalities. The JCEDC's behavior is appallingly unprofessional, especially coming from a team supposedly skilled in business negotiations and public relations.