On April 7, I wrote an entry on the GoBurley.com website concerning the resolution of a court action brought against Burley City Councilman, Dennis Curtis, by the city’s self-appointed moral guardian, John Walsh. The court’s decision was accurately and fairly documented by the T-N reporter and by all accounts should have brought the issue to a resolution.
However, Mr. Walsh could not leave “well enough alone” and has subsequently opened up the “closed book,” demanding Mr. Curtis’s resignation from the City Council. This prompts me to reiterate the point I made on the website – Mr. Walsh’s verbal bullying of Mr. Curtis and other members of the city’s government cannot be litigated as easily as physical bullying. And since much of Mr. Walsh’s diatribe has been published by Councilman Jay Lenkersdorfer in a publication which he owns (The Weekly Mailer,) it would seem that Mr. Lenkersdorfer is violating the conflict of interest standard held by elected public officials, and incidentally by all ethical journalists.
Logic tells us that if Mr. Curtis were to be sanctioned by the Burley City Council for “violating his oath as a city councilman,” as John Walsh stated in a letter published in the Weekly Mailer, it would follow that Mr. Lenkersdorfer should be given his walking papers too.
Mr. Walsh would do well to cease and desist before his angry rhetoric should create a consequence which would not be in his best interests. His demands for Curtis’s resignation could create a sticky wicket for Mr. Lenkersdorfer, the person who is willing to publish his accusations in his “Sound-Off” column. Perhaps leaving well enough alone could be the best option for all concerned, and our city government could continue to function in a more civil manner. After all, these officials were elected by the people of Burley, not appointed by Mr.Walsh.
Sincerely,
Sarah M. Blasius
Burley, Idaho
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Sarah,
Thank you for including this letter in GoBurley and for writing the letters that you have. I think you do bring up a great point here….
In Chapter 8 of the Burley City Code we find the “Code of Ethics” for public officials and employees that states…
“The people have a right to expect that every public official and employee will conduct himself in a manner that will tend to preserve public confidence in and respect for the government he represents.
Such confidence and respect can best be promoted if every public official and employee, whether paid or unpaid, and whether elected or appointed, will uniformly: a) treat all citizens with courtesy, impartiality, fairness and equality under the law; and b) avoid both actual and potential conflicts between their private self-interest and the public interest.
After reading this, you could probably find fault with every employee and public official in Burley depending on how you want to interpret the law. So, the question would be “How does this code need to be interpreted?”
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Point well made, Mike – the code speaks directly to the crux of the matter. I feel we have the right to hold public entities to the provisions of that code, particularly those we elect to represent the citizens of Burley, and environs. My letter states my position on the issue, as does the code of ethics to be followed by journalists. Mr. Lenkersdorfer is in violation of both codes.
The court has already dealt with Mr. Curtis’s behavior – the verdict is still out on those who occupy positons on the City Council.