By Brendan Ulmer
Ulmer Uncensored
HUTCHINSON—Hutchinson’s size creates some unique political dynamics.
Hutchinson is big enough that factions and conflict are inevitable. There are simply too many people and too many organizations not to have opposing interests at times.
On the other hand, Hutchinson is small enough that organizations with competing interests often have to work side by side with one another.
Of all these institutions—be they taxing entities, businesses, nonprofits, etcetera—there is not one that wouldn’t leave a massive vacuum, should they cease to exist.
This setup makes the relationships between the representatives of these organizations so important. Where there is a gap between the interests of two institutions, those who have been trusted to lead them must be willing and able to build the bridge.
While most of Hutchinson’s leaders recognize the importance of being able to work together, a select, but active, few have been exploiting and, in some cases, exacerbating the divide for their own ends.
I feel a bit naive saying this, but when I took this job at the Tribune last year and learned how a city government and its peer institutions operate, it made me a less cynical person for a time.
I was particularly enchanted by the idea of a citizen making a difference in their community by going to a city council meeting, pleading their case, and maybe changing a council member’s mind.
The more our institutional representatives operate from personal grievances, the less say we will have as Hutchinson’s residents.
I think Hutchinson is very much at risk of slipping into this for the simple reason that cooperation can, at times, be incredibly difficult. It often involves completely removing your personal feelings and grievances from a situation; thus, a reorientation of norms from the discomfort of collaboration to the triumphant pursuit of total victory begins to seem very appealing.
No issue revealed this pitfall in Hutchinson’s political dynamics more than the City of Hutchinson/Hutch Rec conflict. A conflict that, to their credit, the city and rec have recently worked to squash but, nevertheless, refuses to die.
The city and Hutch Rec came into the last council meeting with an agreement for a memorandum of understanding for operations at Salt City Splash. Sure, you could argue that this is something that should’ve been figured out a long time ago, but it is still a great sign that two of Hutchinson’s taxpayer-funded institutions are sitting at the table and working things out, at least on a professional level.
Nevertheless, there continued to be an emphasis in the meeting on the personal conflicts and grievances that Council Member Steve Garza and another meeting attendee have had with Hutch Rec and its executive director, Tony Finlay.
At a time when the temperature could’ve been the lowest in months or years, it instead boiled over, with another council member, Stacy Goss, and her family getting doxxed mid-meeting. Certain residents were posting pictures of her kids, her marriage certificate, and the location of her home on Facebook, all spurred by this Hutch Rec issue.
While I have no doubt that Finlay has at times been unkind or difficult to work with, the public’s time is being wasted by dealing with this during a city council meeting. The city council is not the board tasked with reviewing Finlay’s performance–that would be the recreation commission board.
Also, if the council had to discuss every time a local leader was unkind, the meetings would be a lot longer than they already are.
At this point, Garza’s continued effort to keep the Hutch Rec conversation alive, in a public forum, does nothing but undermine the progress others are working so hard for and sap the energy of the politically active public who, by and large, would like their local institutions to get along.
I am very much looking forward to the next dry, boring, city council meeting. I implore all involved to please help me make my dreams come true.