The other night, I received a phone call from someone that was questioning a post that I had posted on my other site prior to the primary election. I had thought and for the most part hoped that the issue had died.
Well, it is back and I agreed to the person that I would post this to clear things up. In the original post, I wasn't clear and my message was very poor. I was discussing the incumbants and the connection of one of them to Ben Ganther. Well, it could have been assumed that I was referring to Bryan Bain. Not true or the case. Mr. Bain did not nor has he ever had a connection to Ganther.
My point was to connect Ganther to Scheuermann. She was the incumbant that has taken money from Ben Ganther during her 2005 campaign for council. She has previously denied the contribution, even as late as Wed. night to Dan Rylance. Well, on Thursday, I went to City Hall and looked at the campaign finance reports for Scheuermann for Council and found that on January 8, 2005, Ben Ganther donated $100 to the campaign.
I had previously apologized to Mr. Bain for my post then and I will again here. He was not meant to be connected and should not be now.
I hope this clarifies things...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
It takes no investigations to see very clearly that Mrs. Scheruerman has been proven time after time to be both highly incompatent and to lie to suit her needs..those presntly to get re-elected. Before anyone crys foul on her behalf here are just a few examples. Stating that she has never received nor was she connected with Ben Ganther, paper trail proves this was a lie. Speaking to the print and radio media stated that she has had no type of meetings with Tom Doig since the plug was pulled on the Five River's project, again her own contradictory statements on the Oshkosh Northwestern blog, that indeed she did get together with Mr. Doig, but only for "some holiday cheer, but that no City business was discussed.
That she has no conflict of interests in doing the business of the city, yet has had to abstain, and should have abstained from the following votes. The Leach Ampitheather, All work with Ben Ganther, Tom Doig, Phil Martini (CR Meyer) The Convention and Vistors Bureau (of which she is a member, they are presently trying to raisie hotel/motel room taxes, Jeff Schmidt from WOSh is the ring leader, he is also trying to get the sole contract down at the Leach Ampitheather to run the acts, this will be the next big act that is put on by the city, that the fix isn't or wasn't in on this.
Listen to Bob Burnell of late in his chatting up of Downtown, which compared to his past commetary is VERY different! Then listen to him about the Leach, and him slamming PMI for the lack luster performance of the Leach...WAI
T for it people it is coming, and all the while Mrs. Scheuerman and her buddies Jon Dell Antonia, Larry Spanbauer, are working in the background to make her sound like she's one of us, working hard asking tough questions. This is laughable.
I
f Bain suppers are upset that Mr. Bain was somehow enligned (msitakenly with MR. Ganther) then (1) Mr. Bain should take a hard line during the reconsideration coming forward with the Mercy project and prove us wrong. (2) His supporters should be more concerned that his campaign signs share space with Meredith Scheuerman, and that enlignment is as close to evil as one can get!
That was about as run on and poorly written as the piece John Daggett submitted to the Northwestern for his school board bid. Wow.
Since someone brought up the Visitors and Convention Center-- Let’s discuss it further--
If this new tax is implemented it needs to go back as an investment in the Convention Center.
We can’t pay off the debt early but we can use the new tax for improvements to the center. Too many city projects in the past get approved without funds for maintenance and upkeep expenses.
We have to PLAN Ahead! We have to take care of the structures and facilities we build. City projects NEED to have a separate maintenance/upkeep fund.
NO NEW TAX unless that new tax money goes back to the debt of the center and provides upgrades to the present structure.
NOT SOME OTHER SPECIAL PROJECT.
Invest the ROOM TAX MONIES FOR CONVENTION CENTER ONLY!
Here are some other questions that deserve answers as well BEFORE a decision can be made.
When was the CVB for the city of Oshkosh established?
Initially room taxes were established to retire the debt and provide office space and staff salaries.
How much of the debt has been retired from the tax?
How much money was blown away to move and upgrade offices?
How many times have the offices for the CVB been moved?
If we want to advance the downtown area and promote the Convention Center,why did the CVB move out.
How much money was lost through poor money management/
Other purposes? Possible renovation of the Convention Center?
Sounds like we're creating a tax without a sound plan.
Sounds like we want to tax our visitors for apples, then use the funds for oranges, or plums, or maybe pineapples, or whatever fruity tourism thingy-thing presented.
That's not very fiscally responsible. The city doesn't even know what it's going to do with the Convention Center. It's still tied to the sale of the Plaza hotel, isn't it?
Question on Council procedures what is included in the packets?
Does the council get a copy of resolutions before they vote?
Example" The city webpage affords the opportunity to view Document 07-88.
The resolution clearly states the connection for D. Aubar and B.Ganther.
Was this information available to councilors?
If so than Mr. Kinney did not hide anything? Councilors failed to READ what they were voting on.
Actually, the connection that is shown on the resolution covers the CURRENT project.
The partnership that is referred to in the news is the old one that was in place in 2002 when Ganther went to the council for money to start a project. Anbar was part of a different company then and it was not known by the Council that there was a connection until AFTER the vote.
As for your question about the packet... yes, they have what you see online and more. There are many memos that are included along with supporting documentation for the meeting. It can be overwhelming to go through in just a couple of days.
I hope this clarifies things...
Thank You Kent
The information you provided is very helpful.
So here's another question for you:
This question surrounds the idea of too many candidates coming from UWO or with strong ties to UWO.
Should taxpayers be concerned with the candidates that have ties with UWO and Madison?
In a recent Eye on Oshkosh interview Mr. Bain and Mr Palmeri
stated that it would NOT be an issue it 3 councilors have to obstain from a vote. Why would taxpayers vote for "less" representation?
In discussions we have had with neighbors and business people it appears that the University is quietly "taking over" the City.
Other concerns discussed are the
teachers contracts and union representation. Others voice serious issues on how the OASD and UWO are so closely enter-twined.
Are these concerns and issues valid?
That is a valid question and I have planned to create a post regarding this issue.
Do I think it's an issue? YES.
If there are 3 on the council that have to abstain, and there is a conflict because of another member, there is no longer a quorum. Therefore there is no vote.
The likelihood is remote, but it does exsist. Especially if Jessica King is also elected. She also has ties to the university.
So, to say that having ties to the University is not a factor is false. BUT, it isn't as big of a factor as some may want to portrait.
I hope this clarifies this.
It is the "ties" to the university that does bother some voters and I think they have a legitmate agrument. Some of the agrument stems from the mangement of the university system statewide. They really do not know how to budget or live within a budget. Look at the MILLIONS of dollars lost with some payroll software program that failed to work.
UWO professors and employees are part of the public employee unions a very strong union in this area. Not to bring up healthcare and employee contracts and make that a subject again but unions support unions.
Some fear too many councilors with university ties will govern city politics and that would NOT be good for the City. We do not need the aggorant attitude protrayed by University staffers.
Lastly Mr Palmei seems to be the ME, ME, ME, GUY He has already decided the changes "HE" will make
not changes the council will make.
"Not to bring up healthcare and employee contracts and make that a subject again but unions support unions."
I agree 100% with this comment. That is the primary reason I will not vote for Mr. Palmeri.
You may vote against someone because of their involvement in a union. I am am going to vote FOR people because of their involvement in unions.
Yup people like you are what cost Kent a run at a council seat. You have many strong supporters and they combine to maintain your entitlement driven union world which is almost as detrimental to the average oshkosh taxpayer as bloated corporate CEO's. You and they are cut from the same cloth I'm affraid and all that spells doom for us taxpayers.
Than don't complain as your taxes continue to increase!
I count 2 very good reasons NOT to vote for Bain or Palmeri and possibly King.
UWO and Union connections.
I plan to vote:
Monte/Becker for School Board.
Bain/Cornell for Council.
Esslinger for Mayor.
Please join me!
Entitlement driven union world:
Is precisly the world of public service employees INCLUDING UWO professors.
These will add to the detrimental to the average oshkosh taxpayer.
Would we want bloated corporate CEO's.running the city?
Lawyers and UWO professors are no different.
Good to finally see some attempt to reign in the run-away cost of labor in the city. Approving a 1% increase for the City Manager is the first step. Even Bill Castle said that public sector wages were becoming out-of-line compared with the private sector. This momentum will hopefully become more established council wide and carry over with future union negotiations.
Good job Council!!
Post a Comment