you vet your sources?

is there a line of people outside your door just waiting to 'leak' information to you?

most likely you only have one source

lets use a simple process of elimination

if your 'inside source' is a council member it would most likely NOT be any of the council members that have been on council for an extended amount of time

if it was one of those council members you would have be getting 'leaks' for a much longer time

also any council member that has served for an extended amount of time would know that 'leaking' confidential city information could have them removed from council

is it correct that there a two newly appointed council members?

of those two council members which one would have a need to 'leak' information to you?

which one has been the most critical of the city since being sworn into council?

That's your opinion. The potential was high for two of the candidates to harm the city's ability to function, so I would argue that from an ethical standpoint, releasing the names was the right thing to do.

I don't know exactly, but there's a cost for re-posting the job on a national scale, and there's a cost for city employees (including councilors) to do the search again (they get paid so their time is money).

Obviously. And it is more than one source.

*edit* Actually, it depends on what you mean by "involved with the executive council sessions." My sources have knowledge of the search process, which means that they are privy to issues discussed in executive council, but may or may not have been present during those meetings.

Councilors are certainly not the ONLY people who knew the names of the candidates and how the search was progressing.



That's highly speculative, without having a copy of the confidentiality agreement. Those agreements should have been released to the public but were not.

*edit* Also, revealing executive session information does not automatically mean a councilor can be disciplined or removed from council. They definitely wouldn't "face charges" because there are really no state laws on the books in that regard. Individual cities have their own rules on the books relating to releasing executive session information.

Geneva does not have any rules on the books or in the city charter related to possible "punishments" for releasing executive session information.

So actually, no, nobody involved with releasing the information could "face charges."



There are only a very few, specific types of leaked information that a journalist is legally prevented from revealing, and this type of leak does not fall into that category.



All of this is complete speculation, even the idea that it was a councilor who leaked the information.

Speculation is what ends up happening when government is unnecessarily secretive.

You might be surprised at the list of sources that I have, not only pertaining to this story, but also related to other areas of city operations. I have been given information by my sources that I've chosen not to release for various reasons. You would know some of their names, others you may not.

I have had more than one source providing information related to the city manager search.

When city government is not sufficiently transparent, people are forced to speculate on what's really happening.

All of the above is 100% speculation.

Remember, the sole reason given publicly by the city for the confidentiality agreement was to protect the identities of the applicants who might currently be employed and don't want their employers to know they are looking for other work.

Two of the final three candidates were unemployed at the time the names were released, and the other was an internal candidate.

There was no reason, according to official statements by the city, to keep the names of the final three candidates a secret.

Also, bluezone, which candidate out of the final three do you think should have been named city manager?

Also a question for bluezone or anyone else who would like to answer:

As I've mentioned, many cities conduct city manager searches openly and transparently, revealing names of candidates and inviting the citizenry to meet those candidates at open public forums to ask questions and give input.

Why do you think Geneva needs to conduct a city manager search in secret when other cities are able to do it transparently and openly?

What if the leaker is Sage Gerling, in a clever, diabolical plan to advance her own career? All three candidates are tainted by this "leak". We need to keep searching, not settle for the least offensive candidate.

Why would Sage Gerling have been given the names of the other candidates in the running? That doesn't make sense.

I would also offer that Gerling is not simply the "least offensive." She's the only candidate that is NOT offensive.

In any case, this is just more speculation, and speculation is what happens in the absence of transparency.

Sage Gerling might be qualified to represent the left, progressive, loud-mouthed minority in Geneva, but she is not someone who is capable of representing all the people and especially the majority who are black, white and brown working class folks who dont give a hoot about fancy restaurants and progressive ideas about garbage, etc.  Although much of that is fine with me, its not where the focus should be at this time.

The working class majority want reliable transportation to get to work, access to cheap nourishing food, good schools, day care, healthcare, help for senior citizens, child councelors, adult and senior counselors to assist with day to day issues.  Practical and real stuff, not fluffy pretty, arent-you-wonderful, ideas that only serve a small segment of citizens.  those citizens who have the time and money to dream about better coffee wine and beer served in new hipster joints.

Geneva needs a city manager with a broader, more practical view than Sage Gerling has.  Tourists dont want to come to a unhappy city.  When the people are happy and secure and free to express themselves, that is very attractive.  We need a city manager who will serve the majority working class of Geneva.  Sage Gerling seems like a nice woman, i just dont see her as being the best CM for Geneva at this time.  The focus must shift away from the progressive and toward the average guy and gal and their needs.  Build the bottom up.  The working class majority is suffering.  Cant you see that?

if the names were not leaked for the prior city manager search then they should not have been releases this time

if you do not know the cost then how can you say it is costly

there must have been more than just 2 that submitted their resume

just go down the list

is it true that council members sign a sworn statement NOT to release information released during executive session?

if a council member released confidential information talked about in executive session should that council member be removed from their position?


if that same council member released confidential information that was talked about in executive that may have jeopardized the cities position in legal, financial or other serious matters it should not be acceptable


get rid of the 'mole'...

if the executive sessions are not kept confidential then just have the same talks during regular council meetings

and yet all your sources did not intervene earlier to review the candidates that you are now questioning

did the council members sign a sworn statement prior to them being appointed to council NOT to release confidential executive sessions information?

if you have 'leaked' information who is to say others do not

Martin Murphy and Rick Finn certainly wouldn't represent the working class, either.

Also, I think your characterization of Sage Gerling is way, way off the mark.



Gerling was instrumental in working on the comprehensive plan, so she most certainly has a deeper understanding of the needs of the working class than most people in city government, and probably most residents.

She has sat down, talked with and worked closely with nearly every advocacy group in the city addressing all of the issues you're bringing up, before she was interim city manager and since.

How on earth did you invent this concept that she only cares about "progressives" or the "left" or "hipsters?" In fact, I know that Sage has had differences with various groups who would fall under this category, but the people in those groups still respect Gerling. Do you even live in Geneva? I'm flabbergasted that you could be THIS far off-base about her involvement in the city.



You mean like Rick Finn or Martin Murphy?



Again, I'm utterly perplexed that you have somehow concluded that Sage Gerling doesn't care about or know about the problems facing the working class majority in the city, and instead have painted her as some sort of weakling who would only serve a small number of Genevans.