Loren Martell Chronicles my Censure.
I’m glad he mentioned the following because the Trib had one of my severe faces on its front cover during my Censure with the explanation that I was speaking angrily.
Breaches of data practice can bring civil penalties of up to $15,000, and Welty was understandably concerned about what might happen to him in that regard. He questioned whether courts have latitude in levying fines, depending on the type of data breached. When he started asking Rupp about the procedure of pursuing such a matter in the legal system, Chair Miernicki jumped in and lectured that he was “dealing with conjecture, Down the line, if something happens, these questions can be asked.”
“The questions I’m raising are very germane.”
“Right now,” Miernicki cut him off again, “the only thing that’s.”
“Mr. Chair, you are talking over me!”
“No, no, no, no, no, I’m.” the chair objected, talking over him.
The heated exchange went on, while the underlying point remained in limbo. Was the vote for censure as far as the matter would go? The point was never made clear, and who can be sure with this Board? The chair did say, “Down the line, if something happens.”
I was more than a little impatient. This is about the third time Chair Miernicki denied me a chance to ask questions of a legal nature. The first time was after I drove with my wife for eleven straight hours from St. Louis starting at 3AM to get to a suddenly called meeting with the staff of the State Auditor. The Chair announced at that meeting that it would last for only two hours to spare the Auditor’s staff a late long drive back to Minneapolis.
The second instance regarded the Mary Rice report which Chair Miernicki adjourned precipitously while my light was on to make sure I couldn’t ask any questions about the legal implications of our attorney Kevin Rupp. It seemed as though Mr. Rupp’s only concern was that I not ask questions that might skirt the data privacy of one individual who I blame for the last nine months of legal misery.
The third instance was at my Censure. I thought the Board had a second removal in mind and I attempted with no success to ask Mr. Rupp about the implications for me. Chair Miernicki once again denied me a chance to make inquiries with the backing of his 5-2 majority.
Mr. Rupp is apparently solely the attorney for the Board majority to the exclusion of the board minority cost be damned.
