Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ArunawayNERD t1_j6gsrio wrote

The connection about Klein's past ethics violations and the candidate pool issue was very interesting. I had heard about each issue separately, but embarrassingly I had not put two and two together.

Also makes me think about how if I remember correctly he got hung up on some of the simplest audit committee recommendations (let alone the more complicated ones) at the last board meeting. Like don't use your official CA email for non CA business ... something literally every job I have ever had has required of me

11

Rashaverik t1_j6gwm1s wrote

Interestingly enough. Eric Greenberg went on about not having a CA email, yet the Village of Riverhill has listed him with a CA email addresses, since he was elected.

If CA is handing out address that are simply mail forwarders to the Board Member's personal email account, then that needs to change ASAP.

2

YoureUsingCoconuts t1_j6gzzzo wrote

Current CA Employee here. Our e-mail adresses are managed by Google. I've never been foolish enough to try to set a forwarding rule to my personal address, but it was definitely not instituted automatically.

7

Rashaverik t1_j6hrfz9 wrote

Good to hear. I hope the 'ca-board.org' domain is handled this way as well.

On the CA website all the Board members have CA-board.org email addresses. A few of the Villages have their CA Rep listed with personal email addresses, not their CA-board.org addresses.

How have some of these people been in office nearly a year (some have served longer terms) and don't conduct business using their CA account. Clearly they've been using personal email to conduct CA business. That'd get you fired from most any job.

1

goliebs OP t1_j6hs1mn wrote

I think he meant he didn’t have a village email address distinct from his CA email.

2

goliebs OP t1_j6hruwf wrote

Alan’s comments about email addresses didn’t strike me as that bad. I don’t think he was saying “I should be able to use my CA email address for anything I want.” Instead, I thought he was saying “I should be able to use my CA email address for my position as a Columbia Council Representative.”

Not saying he’s correct about that but, to be fair, the distinction between CA Board member and Columbia Council Rep can be opaque.

1

ArunawayNERD t1_j6j20sj wrote

Yeah its a minor thing I agree, but it just stands out to me. Like if such a minor inconvenience bothers you enough to bring it up for discussion I cant imagine how he might truly feel about the more substantial requirements / recommendations

2

goliebs OP t1_j6j2ocu wrote

I agree with that. And, emails aside, it highlights a basic flaw (or at least difficulty) in the governance to have such a blurry line between Columbia Council and CA Board.

1