Dilbert on Ethics - don't miss it

Perfect. You've got to read Dilbert today. Scott Adams' timing was perfect.

Clip it from your morning (July 26) paper, or view it here. How could he know?

The Northwest Herald article on yesterday's attempt at a hearing by the McHenry County Ethics Commission can be read here. Kevin Craver, the author of the Northwest Herald article, nailed it when he wrote about the Commission - "which often appeared during the hourlong meeting to be struggling with how to proceed."

The Commission was lost and stumbled through the meeting. What was the purpose of the County Board member liaison at the Commissioner's table? Observer only? Advisor?

The Commission headed into Closed Session after allowing Gummerson to launch into a lengthy defense of Zinke during the Public Comment period and without ever formally convening the hearing.

Cal Skinner should claim a foul that the Commission issued a decision without opening the hearing, without swearing in Skinner and Zinke and without controlling the questioning themselves. The Commission got stone-walled by "lawyering" and rolled over. It was a disgraceful example of public-service government at its worst.

During the Public Comment period I asked the Commission to identify whether Gummerson represented Zinke as Undersheriff or as political candidate. They didn't. Craver wrote that "Gummerson and Lee would not comment on who paid for their services, citing professional regulations forbidding them from disclosing that information." He asked them the wrong question.

Craver should have asked who their client was: Zinke the undersheriff or Zinke the candidate.

Oh, well. There is always FOIA. We'll have to wait 2-3 months for Gummerson to submit his bill to the McHenry County Sheriff's Department and then find out how much he charged MCSD for yesterday's dog-and-pony show.

And, if Zinke files a frivolous lawsuit against Skinner, Cal should be ready with his own against Zinke - for filing a frivolous lawsuit against Skinner. Cal had a valid complaint, and the Commission should have respected it and conducted a proper hearing.

Did anyone else notice the nod, when the Commission returned to open session? Gee, maybe it was just a nervous tic. Yeah, sure. Did the Commission vote in closed session and then just go through the formality after returning to open session? Did they all indicate how they were going to vote, or did they merely discuss the written complaint and Gummerson's and Lee's statements?

Before the Minutes of that closed session get destroyed, the public should get a look at them. And/or hear the recording of the closed session. It was recorded, wasn't it?