The Strib writes that 3 council members aren’t attending the $1.4MM “couples counseling.” Wonsley and Chugtai are apparently two, cited elsewhere. Don’t know the third, but I’m going to guess Chowdhury.
The first step in fixing a problem is admitting you have a problem. Our biggest obstacles on the council either don’t think we have a problem, or have no desire to fix the problem. That’s a problem.
Mike (and Terry), I've been kind of morbidly fascinated by this whole story. If one looks hard enough, one can find in print that there were one, two, or three absent from the first session. The only thing all accounts I've seen seem to agree on is that Wonsley was not there, and I've seen one account that she has bragged about that.
I'm concerned about the cost, but less concerned than I might be if the Council and Mayor weren't in the habit of almost always overpaying for damn near everything by doing things the no-bid way. MN state government seems to have adopted the same practice in recent years, so I'm coming around to an attitude of just letting it go if/when it works, and arguing for one group or another to stop getting no-bid work if/when it's obvious they are no good at what they do (which does not yet seem to happen, alas...). If this works, we'll easily get $1.4Mill of value out of it. And I hope it does. I just don't know why we would believe in advance that it will.
Elected city government is not comparable to a business, no matter how many people say "no one would be allowed to behave like this in a business". In a business, no employee has been put there by his/her boss specifically to make life miserable for other employees by, among other things, denying the others any cooperation. MOST of our CM's (on both "sides") *have* been put there by their "bosses" (significant numbers of their voters) to do precisely that. They have to change; and WE have to change. So if this breaks the vicious cycle and allows change, it'll be worth it.
Terry, I'm so glad you wrote about this uplifting event and the enlightened speech that shone a light back on the good work that Minnesotans have and can do.
I participated in team building events while working in a large for-profit. Participation was mandatory, and negativity was very likely to reflect poorly on one’s performance review. It works well with effective leaders who clearly articulate goals and expectations and are focused on improving performance. In particular, I doubt Wonsley fears consequences for her defiance. If the consultants can get through to her, it will be truly amazing!
The Strib writes that 3 council members aren’t attending the $1.4MM “couples counseling.” Wonsley and Chugtai are apparently two, cited elsewhere. Don’t know the third, but I’m going to guess Chowdhury.
The first step in fixing a problem is admitting you have a problem. Our biggest obstacles on the council either don’t think we have a problem, or have no desire to fix the problem. That’s a problem.
Mike (and Terry), I've been kind of morbidly fascinated by this whole story. If one looks hard enough, one can find in print that there were one, two, or three absent from the first session. The only thing all accounts I've seen seem to agree on is that Wonsley was not there, and I've seen one account that she has bragged about that.
I'm concerned about the cost, but less concerned than I might be if the Council and Mayor weren't in the habit of almost always overpaying for damn near everything by doing things the no-bid way. MN state government seems to have adopted the same practice in recent years, so I'm coming around to an attitude of just letting it go if/when it works, and arguing for one group or another to stop getting no-bid work if/when it's obvious they are no good at what they do (which does not yet seem to happen, alas...). If this works, we'll easily get $1.4Mill of value out of it. And I hope it does. I just don't know why we would believe in advance that it will.
Elected city government is not comparable to a business, no matter how many people say "no one would be allowed to behave like this in a business". In a business, no employee has been put there by his/her boss specifically to make life miserable for other employees by, among other things, denying the others any cooperation. MOST of our CM's (on both "sides") *have* been put there by their "bosses" (significant numbers of their voters) to do precisely that. They have to change; and WE have to change. So if this breaks the vicious cycle and allows change, it'll be worth it.
I am okay with the city trying to get their leaders aligned. However it brings up the interesting idea of who owns this ?
I mean should the city really foot the bill¿
Should the people who do not have interpersonal skills pay for it instead?
It maybe a split of some kind….
If it was $100,000 instead of 14 times that would we even notice?
If each council member plus the mayor kicked in 100K, they might be a little more “invested” in the outcome…..
I agree with your analysis and believe The Advocates and its many supporters are dedicated to making a difference!
And I agree with Mike Shulman ~ participation in the City Council/Mayor “therapy sessions” MUST BE MANDATORY for all involved.
Terry, I'm so glad you wrote about this uplifting event and the enlightened speech that shone a light back on the good work that Minnesotans have and can do.
I participated in team building events while working in a large for-profit. Participation was mandatory, and negativity was very likely to reflect poorly on one’s performance review. It works well with effective leaders who clearly articulate goals and expectations and are focused on improving performance. In particular, I doubt Wonsley fears consequences for her defiance. If the consultants can get through to her, it will be truly amazing!