On the Threats of Violence...

I am sick and tired of the threats that are being sent around to Democratic Congress Members that supported the Health Care Bill.

I am even more sick of the denials from the GOP that their rhetoric does not feed it. I am also disgusted when they say that these threats are isolated incidents.

We all get these sort of emails from the right. They are a lot more common than you might think.

It seems to be a regular tactic from that side of the political debate. When the publicity surrounding the Obama billboard was in its height, I was getting regular emails both in support and against the billboard.

I was also receiving threatening and ignorant emails. Some examples are below (no names or emails have been changes to protect anybody:

Get your head out of the sand pile and take a look at history. I am angry along with millions of other concerned citizens...legal citizens...that our president is arrogant and hell bent on doing his own thing.
I hope more signs go up and hopefully someone will finally ask our leader, just where do you really come from? And maybe you might be able to give us a TRUTHFUL answer for a change.
Swanhild Tess
17365 Sierra Lane
Brookfield, Wi 53045


----------------


jef hall
...
Fri, March 5, 2010 6:12:17 PM

From: Pa Bel
To: chair@winnebagodems.org
your an idiot. go live with hugo chavez and that the rest of the liberals idiots with you.

----------------

Wisconsin Billboard Calls for Obama's Ouster
...
Mon, February 15, 2010 12:22:01 PM
From: Fred
To: chair@winnebagodems.org
Jef Hall is the chairman of the Winnebago County Democratic Party. He says having a bad opinion of the president doesn't mean there's been an impeachable offense.

Having a bad opinion of the Obama doesn’t means he hasn’t committed impeachable offenses either. But I’m sure of one thing, many brainwashed leftist fools will pay dearly come November for crawling in bed with that narcissistic corrupt anti-American radical fascist lying worthless nigger in our White House. The scum of America, the filthy worthless slime of the human race. In fact many polls are saying it may be a political blood bath for the totally corrupt and morally bankrupt National leadership of your radical socialist party.

Have a nice day, Fred

----------------

If I were to search farther in my emails, I could find a lot more.

This sort of stuff needs to stop.

My Proposed Resolution to Purchase the Historic Fire Engine from Paul Esslinger

Here, in it's entirety, without comment, is my proposed resolution. I will be sending this to the Mayor, City Councilors and Staff (a few small edits from the original):

PURPOSE: ACCEPT 1915 FIRE ENGINE / AUTHORIZE REIMBURSEMENT

INITIATED BY: (a council member)

WHEREAS, A 1915 Fire Engine formerly used by the Oshkosh Fire Department became available for purchase and Paul Esslinger stepped forward to secure the purchase of the vehicle and its transportation to the City to preserve it for the City of Oshkosh, and

WHEREAS, Mr. Esslinger has expended $9724.50 for the purchase, transportation and insurance of the vehicle from the time of purchase to the present, and

WHEREAS, the Council previously approved, by Resolution 09-438, the establishment of a fund to accept donations for the purchase and maintenance of the Engine, and

WHEREAS, the fund currently contains $2905.02, and

WHEREAS, Mr. Esslinger would like to transfer ownership of the vehicle to the City at this time.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that the appropriate City staff are hereby directed and authorized to accept title to the vehicle in the name of the City of Oshkosh and take possession of the vehicle

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed upon presentation of documented costs to the Oshkosh Common Council and proper transfer of the title from Mr. Esslinger to pay out the amount of these documented costs to Mr. Esslinger from the City of Oshkosh's General Fund.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized to disperse funds from the purchase and maintenance fund collected previously to the passage of this resolution by the Common Council, as needed for the maintenance and storage of the Engine once it is in the possession and ownership of the City.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is also hereby authorized to collect donations for the historic firetruck to repay the general fund of the City for disbursements made in relation to the purchase and maintenance of the historic firetruck.

The Oshkosh Northwestern Agrees - Editorial: City should buy antique fire truck

The editorial is here.

I agree with most of what they have to say here:

And finally, this week was a resolution to turn the truck over to the city and disburse $2,900 in donations to the mayor. When a citizen, Jef Hall, questioned the appropriateness of the Mayor participating in the discussion from the dais and the overall appearance of the transaction, the Mayor and council member Dennis McHugh took umbrage.
...
The best, cleanest solution to the problem, as suggested by Hall, is for the council to make a determination that the fire truck has historic value to the city and buy the truck from Esslinger. They can designate the $2,900 in donations to a maintenance fund for the truck and write a $9,724 check to the Mayor.

I disagree with the suggestion that funds should come from the Fire Dept's budget. This is a vital budget that can easily go over. If, at the end of the year, the Fire Dept has $10,000 left, they can pay back the general fund with their surplus.

But, this is an item for the entire city, so the funds should come from the general fund. Otherwise you could argue that the money should come from parks, if it ends up displayed there, or business improvement, if it is in parades, or any number of other places....

I also feel a separate fund should be opened to pay back the city, AFTER Mr. Esslinger is paid. This will allow fund-raising for the truck to be separate from any payments to Mr. Esslinger.

I also agree that:

The council can leave it to the voters to decide if Mayor's dalliance with the fire truck was appropriate.

I think purchase without approval followed by a demand for payment, yet terming it a donation was an act of hubris on Mayor Esslinger's part. However, if I was on the council and it was brought forward to purchase an historic artifact such as this for $10,000 I would most likely support it. My problem with this is not the act of securing the item, but the process followed.

Let's settle this, get the truck into the community and move on.

I will be forwarding a copy of my resolution to the Council and staff for consideration.

I hope the Oshkosh Northwestern will also agree that Mr. Esslinger should step down from the Council Dias for the debate on this resolution.

Why City funds for the Firetruck?

Re-reading my previous post about my proposed firetruck resolution, I realized I forgot to explain why I think Mayor Paul Esslinger should be paid from city funds. Here are a few points:

Point #1: It removes all questions about potential conflicts from donations. There is not a current system set up to record all donations. There are several hundred dollars in the fund right now without a donor recorded. We do not know who or how many people these came from. By removing the ability to give to the fund anonymously, it protects both the public and Mayor Esslinger from questions relating to influence of a large, nameless donor. If the city were to continue allowing 'toss money in the bucket' donations, anyone could approach the Mayor and say they put in the bulk of it. There is a reason why these types of donations are not allowed for campaigns.

Point #2: If we allow donations into the fund to be directly funneled to Mayor Esslinger, they should follow all the rules used for campaign financing. See above for a reason. These were set up to ensure no donor would have an outsize influence on the official. For the Mayor of Oshkosh, or any council member, the limits are $.01/person in individual contributions and $.0075/person in PAC contributions. So, if Oshkosh has 65,000 people, then you may receive a max contribution of $650/individual and $487.50/PAC. I understand there has already been a $1,000 contribution to this fund, more than would be allowed for a campaign.

Point #3: If this firetruck is an asset for Oshkosh (as I believe it is) then Oshkosh should be willing to pay for it, if Mayor Esslinger is unable to truly donate it. This would not preclude a donor fund to continue around the firetruck. There would be a lot less questions if donations could be secured without a potential direct pass-through to the Mayor. I would encourage people to continue to donate to the firetruck fund, after the City makes Mayor Esslinger whole. I'm sure people with business before the city might be more willing to donate if they knew it would not be a direct pass-through to the city.

Therefore, because of my thoughts about Point #3 above, I have added the following to my potential resolution for payment for the historic firetruck:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the finance director is also hereby authorized to continue to collect donations for the historic firetruck to repay the general fund of the City for disbursements made in relation to the purchase and maintenance of the historic firetruck.

By making Mayor Esslinger whole now, but continuing to allow donations, we can pay back the general fund, while removing the potential conflicts of interest in this matter.

That said, Mayor Esslinger should remove himself from the Council Dias for these discussions.  If he does not, parliamentary procedure allows for a member of the council to call for a vote for his removal for this resolution.  I hope a member will.

If I were writing the firetruck resolution...

UPDATE: I added another BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED due to the thoughts expressed in this post.

At the Oshkosh Common Council Meeting tonight, I outlined my problems with the resolution for reimbursement for the historical firetruck that Mayor Paul Esslinger wants to 'donate' to the city.

Point #1: It is not a donation if you want to be reimbursed.  It is a purchase.  Mayor Esslinger purchased the firetruck, and wants the city to purchase it from him.The fact that he proposes that these funds come not from taxpayers but donors does not change the fact that it is a purchase, not a donation.  What we are really talking about is how to finance this purchase.  Councilor McHugh compared the firetruck to the Leech and Kimball Auditorium, but neither of those donors required that they be paid in return for their donation.

Point #2: Unlike Councilor McHugh said in his questioning, I was not accusing Mayor Esslinger of corruption.  I was pointing out that he was entering a very delicate area, and he should be careful about how he moves forward.  I had a suggestion that the resolution should come from another councilor, or that the money should come from city funds.  Both of these would allow for a separation from the Mayor that removes future potential questions.

Point #3: I am glad we have the potential of getting the firetruck for the city!  I think it will be an asset, but I don't want it a city asset under a permanent storm cloud of controversy. 

Point #4: There is a difference between the letter of the law, legal opinions and public perception for public officials.  Mayor Esslinger said he received an opinion that he can still run the meeting as they discuss the firetruck reimbursement, just not vote on the issue.  But, if you watched the meeting tonight, when Councilor Buchholz suggested a time frame for fund-raising, Mayor Esslinger said, from the Council Dias, "I'd be OK with that." While that is not technically a vote, it is beyond the common sense view of being removed from the process.

Mayor Esslinger should be off the Council Dias, and at the podium like any other citizen while this is debated, which leads to:

Point #5: The resolution should not read "the Mayor" every time that Mayor Esslinger is referenced.  It adds to the perception that this is a special deal for "the Mayor."  It should read "Paul Esslinger" or "the Owner." So that there is not a perception of a special deal for the position versus the person.

So, with that all in mind, I would word the resolution:

PURPOSE: ACCEPT 1915 FIRE ENGINE / AUTHORIZE REIMBURSEMENT

INITIATED BY: (a council member)

WHEREAS, A 1915 Fire Engine formerly used by the Oshkosh Fire Department became available for purchase and Paul Esslinger stepped forward to secure the purchase of the vehicle and its transportation to the City to preserve it for the City of Oshkosh, and

WHEREAS, Mr. Esslinger has expended $9724.50 for the purchase, transportation and insurance of the vehicle from the time of purchase to the present, and

WHEREAS, the Council previously approved, by Resolution 09-438, the establishment of a fund to accept donations for the purchase and maintenance of the Engine, and

WHEREAS, the fund currently contains $2905.02, and

WHEREAS, Mr. Esslinger would like to transfer ownership of the vehicle to the City at this time, without regard to whether the full amount required to reimburse him for his costs has been raised.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Oshkosh that the appropriate City staff are hereby directed and authorized to accept title to the vehicle in the name of the City of Oshkosh and take possession of the vehicle

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized and directed upon presentation of documented costs to the Oshkosh Common Council and proper transfer of the title from Mr. Esslinger to pay out the amount of these costs to Mr. Esslinger from the City of Oshkosh's General Fund.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized to disperse funds from the purchase and maintenance fund as needed for the maintenance and storage of the Engine once it is in the possession and ownership of the City.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is also hereby authorized to continue to collect donations for the historic firetruck to repay the general fund of the City for disbursements made in relation to the purchase and maintenance of the historic firetruck.

Pull It! (The Firetruck Resolution)

Tonight the Oshkosh Common council will consider Resolution 10-99 "Authorize 1915 Fire Engine / Authorize Future Dispersements from Donations"

This should be pulled form the agenda an re-considered at a future meeting (if at all) for several reasons:

1. According to the resolution, it was "Initiated by: Mayor Esslinger"

The Mayor should not be initiating resolutions to have the city give him money. If another councilor is not willing to sponsor the resolution, it should not be considered.

On a similar note, Mayor Esslinger should not be at the council dias for the debate on this issue. The meeting should be turned over to the Deputy Mayor and Mayor Esslinger should go to the floor to operate under the rules any other citizen has during meetings.

2. The resolution establishes a direct route for interests to funnel money to the Mayor through the city.

The resolution directs the City of Oshkosh to:

pay out the amount currently held in the fund established for the purchase and maintenance of the vehicle to the Mayor and is directed to continue to pay out amounts that are donated to the fund monthly, without contrary reservations by the donors, to the Mayor

This literally makes a fund anyone (including those with business before the council) can use to legally funnel money to the Mayor.

...and not campaign contributions, which have a legal, established limit. This would allow money up to the almost $10,000 for the full purchase cost.

Also the phrase "without contrary reservations by the donors" means that up to the $10,000 you cannot donate money to the firetruck's upkeep and housing. All money donated HAS to go to the Mayor regardless of the intent of the donor.

This is either corrupt or inept, and should be pulled.  It is not worth discussion in it's current form.