Joe Parisi and Shelia Stubbs
In a 2020 Isthmus profile of Joe Parisi, the only Dane County Board supervisor who was openly supportive of Parisi was Shelia Stubbs.
Shelia Stubbs may have just had the shortest-lived nomination process in Dane County history. In the space of about three weeks Stubbs went from being nominated to head the county’s sprawling Department of Human Services to being resoundingly rejected by the county board on May 4.
To be sure Stubbs did not help her own cause. She gave conflicting messages about whether or not she would resign her post as state representative from Madison’s west and south sides, even though she had previously said that job took 80 hours a week, a dubious claim for someone in the minority party. She went before her church to rally support for her nomination to the county position and claimed that “God gave me that job” and that, if necessary, she and her supporters would “take it by force.” Then some of those supporters joined her in going over the top. One said they would “storm the Capitol '' and directed a racial slur at Black members of the board who questioned Stubbs’ qualifications.
In the end members of the board’s Black Caucus voted against Stubbs, who is Black and who claimed that she was undergoing unprecedented scrutiny because of it.
But as much as Stubbs was under a microscope, she shared that distinction with County Executive Joe Parisi. Many of the board members who spoke at the meeting in which her nomination was rejected took the county exec to task for his handling of the nomination. In fact, at one of the committee meetings to review Stubbs’ nomination, Supv. Matt Veldran said, “He (Parisi) called us political. I think it’s patently false. I think it’s just the opposite. The idea that we’re just a rubber stamp is a hard thing to swallow.” The Wisconsin State Journal story went on to say that Veldran apologized to Stubbs for getting caught amid the political battles between the board and Parisi.
Three years ago I wrote a profile of Parisi for Isthmus in which I tried to explore the tension between the exec and the board. But I didn’t get very far. As I noted at the time, it was hard to get anyone to talk on the record and, even off the record, no one was very specific or offered an especially compelling example of how Parisi had been vindictive. The general complaint was that he didn’t consult with the board enough.
Paul Nelson, the only supervisor who spoke on the record about this and who was about to retire from the board, said, “I don’t think Joe always saw the board as a partner, but something that was just in the way.” I put that down to the usual tension between any executive and a legislative body. But, having been a mayor, I also have to admit to some sympathy for Parisi’s point of view.
On the other hand, the only supervisor who was openly supportive of Parisi was Shelia Stubbs, who served 16 years on the board. At the time I wrote: “But Stubbs is effusive about Parisi, lauding him in particular for his support on actions to promote racial equity. 'Being an African American is not just a checkmark for me. It’s my life.' She says Parisi is authentic in his support for the black community.”
And, as I noted in the story, there is no question that Parisi, the father of a Black daughter, has a better and more genuine feel for issues of race than most other white liberals. So, how does his Black nominee for one of the county’s most high-profile jobs get rejected, not just by all of the board liberals (her only two votes for approval came from conservatives), but even by the board’s Black Caucus?
Many of her former colleagues seemed to view Stubbs as just an extension of the executive, a close political ally who would do his bidding. And, in fact, Parisi helped promote that perception by running a brief, closed and tightly controlled recruitment process. No search firm was employed and Parisi interviewed only a handful of candidates. It may be true or not, but the process lends credence to the notion that Parisi had his choice in mind from the start.
So, how much was it about race or about Stubbs’ qualifications or about her actions and of those who supported her? And how much of this was about Joe Parisi? Was that overwhelming vote against the nominee or her sponsor? Were they rejecting Stubbs or sending Parisi a message?
It looks to me like it’s some of all those things. If Stubbs and her supporters had not given the board so many reasons to reject her nomination and the board had done that anyway, it would have been a more clear message to Parisi, but it was clear enough anyway.
Some amount of tension between an executive and a legislative body is not only natural, but healthy. Especially in local government settings, part-time alders and supervisors are no match for full-time executives with their own staffs and some measure of control over agency heads. So, it’s good for the legislative branch to push back and hold the executive accountable.
But the tension can go too far. If the Stubbs nomination demonstrates anything, it’s that in Dane County government it now has.
Dave Cieslewicz is a Madison- and Upper Peninsula-based writer who served as mayor of Madison from 2003 to 2011. Both his reporting and his opinion writing have been recognized by the Milwaukee Press Club. You can read more of his work at Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos.
