Where's Jonathan?

Jonathan Krause has announced his candidacy for the 54th...

He has been posting on his 'My Two Cents' blog most weekdays for more than 3 years. However, if you look at the blog counter in the image above, it shows only between 35 and 87 posts.

Lets say he were to post only 4 times per week, and take two weeks of vacation a year. That would be:

50 weeks/year X 4 days/week = 200 posts.

Where did the rest of them go? Isn't this information that the voters might need to make a valid decision on whom to vote?

He has been writing an opinion column for more than three years, yet now that his opinion matters, they are gone?

It looks like it took just one day for Jonathan Krause to become 'just another politician'...

I sure hope someone has those missing posts saved...


Here's a fun one from October 16th, a day you will find missing on his blog (I have bolded some of the items you might want to ask him about):

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2008

Thursday 10-16
Well it appears the State's financial chickens have come home to roost. Much like the "crooks on Wall Street" he likes to deride, Governor Doyle's house of cards has also come crashing down. Years of deferred funding, raiding of the Transportation Fund and budgeting based on structural deficits can no longer be covered up. I had to laugh yesterday when the Governor said he had already made deep cuts in State Government and now things are really going to hurt.

So where to begin? How about with the Seniorcare program--which costs the state 253-million dollars a year. We have a program called Medicare Part D that performs the same social function. Are the benefits exactly the same? No--but Seniorcare was only meant to be in place until Medicare Part D came into being. Everyone in Madison apparently forgot about that. If you are unhappy with the Federal benefit--contact your local Congressman.

Put a freeze on all new state building construction. This is bad news for the UW system, which has a building boom going on around the state--but we can probably get by with the existing classroom space for another few years. Highway and bridge projects are exempt because we should have plenty in the Transportation fund to cover those right Governor? Oh that's right--we gave that money to the schools. I always say every driver deserves a great school.

Finally, own up to the people of the state and admit that Madison has written a whole bunch of checks the taxpayers will have to cover. That means an increase in the sales tax. If tax revenues are down ten percent--then a half-percent hike in the consumption tax will be needed as well. You could have that in place by next July 1st--when the next state fiscal year starts.

We can only hope that The King getting caught without his clothes on will finally lead to some changes in the way the state creates its budget. Maybe putting away a little money for situations like this might be step one. Setting some real priorities could be step two.
POSTED BY JONATHAN KRAUSE AT 4:50 AM 17 COMMENTS LINKS TO THIS POST"

If this is what you believe, stand up for it, don't hide it.

Posted without comment:

Transcript from the end of the Oshkosh City Council meeting:

Esslinger: OK now, Dennis the final thing, and I think you are going to like this the most. I talked about a fundraising drive, and there was money left over. So, I’m here to present the rest of the money. So, before I hand this over I do know a guy that has a firetruck that is looking…

(Council laughs – Palmeri & Poeschl on camera)

Esslinger: I just had to get that in there, I’m sorry. So here’s the rest of the fundraising money.

(Hands Envelope to McHugh)

Esslinger:That’s yours, that’s from the fundraising, for you leaving the council, for the ads, um and the portrait there, not the portrait. Um… No, I’m the only one that knows, so… We’ll put that in the city account and then we’ll dole that out to you… (laughter)

McHugh: I really don’t know how many people donated money, I know it has to be a lot, or how much each one donated. But I tell you. I love Oshkosh people.

A hint for the Oshkosh Common Council:

Go here: http://www.ci.oshkosh.wi.us/municipal_codes/Chapter_02.PDF

And look at these:

ARTICLE III. LEGISLATIVE


SECTION 2-9 COUNCIL DUTIES
(B) Qualifications of Members
The Council shall be the judge of the election and qualification of its members, and may fine or expel for neglect of duty.


SECTION 2-12 PRESIDING OFFICER TO VACATE CHAIR IN ORDER TO ADDRESS COUNCIL
The Mayor or other presiding officer of the Council may speak to any matter before the Council provided, however, that the chair is first vacated and the Deputy Mayor or other member is called upon to occupy it temporarily.


SECTION 2-16 RULES OF ORDER AND PROCEDURE
(G) Rules of Order
The Council shall be governed by Roberts Rules of Order. Every member shall address the presiding officer before speaking and shall not be interrupted except by a call to order. The Council may adopt additional rules of procedure, from time to time, as may be necessary for the efficient conduct of its business.


ARTICLE VIII. PENALTIES
SECTION 2-63 PENALTIES
Any person who shall violate any of the provisions of this Chapter or of any Section thereof, shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a forfeiture of not less than $75.00 nor more than $500.00, together with the costs of prosecution, and in default of payment thereof, by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period not to exceed sixty (60) days. Each day of violation shall constitute a separate offense.

The 'Kraft Defense' & Oshkosh Common Council Rules

Here is a blast from the past:

Council's "Kraft Defense" Doesn't Wash

For the six Councilors to resort to the "Kraft Defense" (i.e. "We were only following the City Attorney's advice.") is crafty, but just doesn't wash. When we elect people to the Council, we should be able to expect that they are capable of comprehending the plain language of the state statutes governing open meetings. We should also expect that they will act independently and according to their own conscience, especially when millions of tax dollars are involved. In the case of the February 14th closed meeting, the impropriety was so clear that the Councilors should not even have had to ask for Kraft's advice before refusing to attend. Or at the very least, they should have listened to the citizens who warned them of the probable violation of law that would take place should they attend, and ask Kraft to solicit advice from the AG's office before proceeding.

I hope Mayor Paul Esslinger and Deputy Mayor Tony Palmeri remember this post from Mr. Palmeri's blog before the next council meeting.

As pointed out in two recent articles in the Northwestern:

Bar, tavern fee repeal could have benefit for Esslinger

James Fitzhenry: Ordinance change shows dark side of mayoral politics

Mayor Esslinger has a stake in two items before the council at the next meeting:

Oshkosh Mayor Paul Esslinger helped shape a resolution to repeal fees that could save the tavern he owns hundreds of dollars annually if approved by the Common Council next month.

Councilor Dennis McHugh sponsored the ordinance that calls for eliminating municipal fees for inspecting jukeboxes, live entertainment, pool tables, bowling alleys, video games and gambling machines, limited service restaurant inspections, temporary banners and projecting signs. Rolling back the fees would cost the city nearly $50,000 in revenue each year.

Esslinger, who owns Screwballs Sports Pub on North Main Street, joined McHugh for a March 16 meeting with City Manager Mark Rohloff to discuss drafting the resolution. The ordinance had a first reading, but no formal action, at the March 23 council meeting.

Why does Mayor Esslinger feel it is OK to participate in this exercise, even though his business will benefit directly from the ordinance?

Esslinger said he has conferred with Oshkosh City Attorney Lynn Lorenson about McHugh’s proposal and he is “completely within his right” to participate and cast a vote on it.

I would hope that Deputy Mayor Palmeri will apply the same logic and standards he applied to former Councils and City Attorneys to this situation and demand Mayor Esslinger to not only refrain from voting on these issues, but to step down for the debate on these items.

Now, it is Mayor Esslinger's own choice whether or not to vote on these issues. He cannot be barred from that (but can be prosecuted/fined for it after if a conflict is determined).

However, by the City of Oshkosh's own Municipal Codes, Mayor Esslinger should not be participating in this debate to the extent he is:

SECTION 2-12 PRESIDING OFFICER TO VACATE CHAIR IN ORDER TO ADDRESS COUNCIL
The Mayor or other presiding officer of the Council may speak to any matter before the Council provided, however, that the chair is first vacated and the Deputy Mayor or other member is called upon to occupy it temporarily.

Deputy Mayor Palmeri or any other member of the council concerned about good government should demand that the Mayor follow their rules and step down for the discussion of these two resolutions.

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.

UPDATE: OshNW Addresses Palmeri's 'Soviet Comments'

James Fitzhenry of the Northwestern addresses Deputy Mayor Tony Palmeri's 'Soviet Comments' in today's column:

QUESTION 3: A Common Council member compares the authorization of an urban deer hunt to something in line with the unbridled power dictated in the old Soviet Union. Those remarks show the council member to be:

A. The lone voice of reason in a sea of corrupt cowards.

B. Dangerously on the edge of irrelevancy.

C. Needing a better way to spend his time.

D. Losing his grip on reality.

We will see if Palmeri addresses (apologizes for) these comments at Tuesdays meeting. (Feel free to chat about it online here)

(P.S. I answer B with a sprinkle of D)

"At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

This is taking a local disagreement way to far.

Deputy Mayor Tony Palmeri, on his blog, compares Oshkosh City Manager Mark Rohloff to Stalin:

I hope we can all agree that a city manager ought not have the power to direct an organization or individual to discharge firearms in violation of city codes. Giving a local executive that kind of power is more in line with the old Soviet Union than the US Constitution.

Here is a little lesson in history for Mr. Palmeri (via Wikipedia):

Researchers before the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union attempting to count the number of people killed under Stalin's regime produced estimates ranging from 3 to 60 million.[72] After the Soviet Union dissolved, evidence from the Soviet archives also became available, containing official records of the execution of approximately 800,000 prisoners under Stalin for either political or criminal offenses, around 1.7 million deaths in the Gulags and some 390,000 deaths during kulak forced resettlement – for a total of about 3 million officially recorded victims in these categories.[73]

While I understand that Mr. Palmeri feels very passionate about the lives of the deer in the city, he admits in his post that he is in the minority on the council for this:

Unlike last year, when only I spoke in opposition, this time the deliberation would have included the voice of Bob Poeschl. Mr. Poeschl openly opposed the deer cull during his campaign

That is still just 2 votes. We still, by Mr. Palmeri's math, have a council that is 5-2 in favor of the cull, even after the election we had during the initial cull.

We should have a debate about the deer cull, a vigorous one, if Mr. Palmeri demands it. And we did. It was passed overwhelmingly by the council.

Calling the City Manager Stalin does not advance the debate. It seems to me that Mr. Palmeri is breaking a sub-set of Godwin's Law of the internet here (also via Wikipedia):

Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies)[1][2] is a humorous observation made by Mike Godwin in 1990 which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[3][2]

I would expect better discourse out of someone with a Doctorate in Rhetoric:

Education:
* 1984 - 1987: PhD, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI. Rhetorical Theory and Criticism, American Public Address
* 1983-1984: M.A., Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, MI. Rhetorical Theory and Criticism
* 1979-1983: B.A. St. John's University, Queens, NY. Rhetoric and Public Address

But, maybe not if you look at the main definition of rhetoric in m-w.com:

rhet·o·ric

1 : the art of speaking or writing effectively: as a : the study of principles and rules of composition formulated by critics of ancient times b : the study of writing or speaking as a means of communication or persuasion
2 a : skill in the effective use of speech b : a type or mode of language or speech; also : insincere or grandiloquent language
3 : verbal communication : discourse

Lets look further into (2)(b)(also):

gran·dil·o·quence

: a lofty, extravagantly colorful, pompous, or bombastic style, manner, or quality especially in language

Sounds about right.

By the way, in case you want background on the title of this post.

Running for Spring Office in Winnebago County

I am starting a FAQ on local offices and campaigns here.

Let me know if you have questions or suggestions.

Tony Talks Poverty... Again...

At the Oshkosh Common Council meeting tonight, Councilor Tony Palmeri went off on a rant about the problems of poverty in Oshkosh. He declared the money for the Grand repairs would be much better spent helping people in poverty rather than supporting the Grand... and then voted to deny this money to people in poverty by spending the money on the Grand.

Now, I am as dedicated to poverty reduction as any elected official (and if anyone would like to discuss my record, I am open). But Palmeri, in his 2.5 years as an elected Oshkosh Common Council Member has done little or nothing to reduce poverty in Oshkosh.

Because Mr. Palmeri is very good at self-promotion, let's look at his major tool for this to evaluate his record: www.talktotony.blogspot.com (the link takes you to a Google search of his blog for the word 'Poverty').

You will find that he has 10 results about poverty on his blog. Tony was first elected in 4/2007. Of these 10, 6 are from before he was elected. Including:

In this post, he calls for the creation of a blue-ribbon panel on poverty consisting of former mayors (mind you, he would not be part of this panel) as a campaign promise.

In this post, he calls for "a jobs summit and/or create an Economic Development Commission to come up with real strategies for maintaining, attracting, and creating family supporting jobs in the community" - another opportunity for talking (but not doing anything) about poverty.

In this post he calls for "a living wage ordinance for the city of Oshkosh" - an item he has had 2.5 ears as a council member to introduce, but has not.

In the posts since his election, he has recorded:

A move by then Mayor Frank Tower (not Palmeri) to create a commission.

A post featuring a Kennedy quote.

A post comparing the war on Drugs with the War on Poverty.

A post complaining how the new ambulance rates will hurt the poor (he voted for it):

We approved new ambulance rates (I was part of the 6-1 majority), but we completely dropped any discussion of how increased rates affect those least able to pay. We gave lip service to that topic at the August workshop, and it did turn out to be just that: lip service. The painful reality is that this council or city government in general does not have in place any coherent anti-poverty program, nor do we seem particularly interested in developing one. We are all responsible for that; I am not trying to blame anyone.

Once again, Mr. Palmeri complained about the neglect of the poor, while continuing to neglect them.

Here is the rub. As a member of the Oshkosh Common Council, he has the opportunity to introduce any resolution at any meeting. The way I see it, he has been in office 52 months, and at 2 meetings a month, that is 104 opportunities to do something on this issue squandered.

Tonight, Mr. Palmeri called once again for more than lip service for Oshkosh's residents in poverty. I hope this time he actually means it.

His record does not look promising.

Health Care Reform Rally, Corn Roast, Stand by the Grand, Labor Day - Lots of Opportunities to Get Involved!

Hello Members and Friends of the Winnebago County Democratic Party!

There are several events over the next 2 weeks that you might like to get involved with:

1. Stand by the Grand!

The Oshkosh Common Council will be voting on repairs to the Grand Opera House at their meeting today Tuesday, August 25th. We need to show our support! Please gather with me in the City Hall parking lot before the meeting and show our Council members how much the people of Oshkosh value their Grand! Let's line the sidewalk with people who know the Grand must continue in our community!

The meeting starts at 5:15, please be there by 4:15!

2. Health Care rally in Green Bay

This Wednesday, August 26th, at 6:00 pm. there will be a major rally in Green Bay to support health care reform!! Send Rep. Steve Kagen back to Washington to fight for health care reform that will provide quality, affordable health care for all Americans.

The rally will be held at the University of Wisconsin Green Bay Phoenix Room. Join us to show America that people from Wisconsin are fair minded, caring people who want EVERYONE to have affordable health care!

3. Winnebago Dems Corn Roast

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?ref=logo#/event.php?eid=118301592309&ref=ts

Great Corn, Great Politics, Great People!

The Corn Roast will be August 29th, from 1-4PM. Once again, it will be held at Winnebago County Park in Shelterhouse 1. Speakers will include Assembly Majority Leader Tom Nelson, Rep Gordon Hintz, Rep Penny Bernard-Schaber and County Executive Mark Harris as well as other invited speakers.

$5 will once again get you a couple of hot dogs and all the corn on the cob you can eat.

4. Labor Day Events in Winnebago County

We will again show our support for labor by marching in the Menasha-Neenah Labor Day Parade Monday, September 7^th. Please meet at Germania Hall – 320 Chute St, Menasha at 9:15 AM for a 10:00 AM Parade start.

After the parade we will spend time at both the Neenah and Oshkosh Labor Day picnics.

Neenah Labor Day Picnic: 157 S Green Bay Rd, Neenah

Oshkosh Labor Day Picnic and Car Show: South Park, Oshkosh

To join both the Democratic Party of WI & your local Winnebago County party, go here: http://www.wisdems.org/membership_sign-up.asp

As always, contact me anytime with questions,

-jef-

Jef Hall

Chair, Winnebago County Democratic Party

2nd Vice Chair, Democratic Party of WI

112 E Irving Ave, Oshkosh, WI 54901

920.203.6883

jef@jefhall.com

www.winnebagodems.com

www.jefhall.com

Authorized and Paid for by the Winnebago County Democratic Party – Jef Hall, Chair

Will the Newest Council Members Decide the Main St Parking Lot Issue?

The Oshkosh Common Council will decide on Tuesday whether to support local small business on Main St or to delay/cancel a previously approved parking lot redesign project.

And, in a show of how elections matter, it will be the 2 newest members of the council who will make the decision.

Severl current council members have come out on this issue. Mayor Esslinger is against it, as is Councilor McHugh. Councilor Palmeri has previously proposed to have this project delayed.

I would assume from previous votes in favor of the project that Councilors King and Tower are in support.

That puts the vote at 3 against the lot & 2 in favor of the lot. Either of the 2 newest councilors, Buccholz or Poeschl can kill the lot.

Elections matter.

What did the kid in the green hat say...?

Courtesy of the Chief:

Life Imitates Art

Or rather, South Park imitates Oshkosh city council meetings.

Well this changes everything....

From today's OshNW:

Poeschl explained he was simply reviewing his notes while at the same time speaking with Palmeri. He said the conversation was geared toward the presentations and that Palmeri did not sway his vote.

"I was flipping through my notes the whole time," he said. "I can understand where the speculation is coming from…but the nature of that conversation was simply geared toward the presentations."

We now know they were discussing the appointment, that was what the presentations were for. This violates open meetings. From the UW Extension Local Government Fact Sheet on WI Open Meetings Law:

Purpose test. This test is met when discussion, information gathering or decision-making takes place on a matter within the governmental body’s jurisdiction. This test is met even if no votes are taken; mere discussion or information gathering satisfies the test.

Emphasis mine.

Here are some quotes from the WI Department of Justice's 2007 Open Meetings Law Guide:

In recognition of the fact that a representative government of the American type is dependent upon an informed electorate, it is declared to be the policy of this state that the public is entitled to the fullest and most complete information regarding the affairs of government as is compatible with the conduct of governmental business.

In order to advance this policy, the open meetings law requires that “all meetings of all state and local governmental bodies shall be publicly held in places reasonably accessible to members of the public and shall be open to all citizens at all times unless otherwise expressly provided by law.”
...
Public officials must be ever mindful of the policy of openness and the rule of liberal construction in order to ensure compliance with both the letter and spirit of the law.

I will address "the letter and spirit of the law" in a later post. Suffice to say that Mr. Poeschl and Mr. Palmeri admitted to violating accessibility to all citizens at all times with their side conversation.

Let's talk about why the two councilors constituted a negative quorum:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has held that the above statutory definition of a “meeting” applies whenever a convening of members of a governmental body satisfies two requirements: (1) there is a purpose to engage in governmental business and (2) the number of members present is sufficient to determine the governmental body’s course of action.

Can two councilors out of six "determine the governmental body's course of action?"

In this case, yes. Remember, at this time Mr. Buchholz had two votes for appointment. It took four out of six to make the appointment. This meant that three votes can block any nomination. Therefore Mr. Poeschl's vote was enough to detirmine the course of action.

This is why the council allows for discussion between the council members in open session. this is where Mr. Poeschl and Mr. Palmeri's conversation should have taken place.

The presentations were supposed to be the way the council made the decision. If they were, as Mr. Poeschl's quote indicates, discussing the presentations, they were in violation of both the letter and spirit of the law.

Things we know, things we suspect

There is a bunch of speculation out there as to what I was saying in this post.

So, to clear the air after a day's more thought let's run through...

Things we know:

1. Councilor Tony Palmeri selected Mr. Buchholz, giving interactions he had with Mr. Buchholz before this meeting as the main reason.

2. Councilor Dennis McHugh selected Mr. Buchholz without giving any real reason.

3. Councilor Bob Poeschl requested a recess to think over which of the candidates he was going to support. Mr. Poeschl and Mr. Plameri had an off-microphone conversation for the entire recess. They were referring to the notes Mr. Poeschl made during the meeting in this conversation.

4. Mayor Paul Esslinger, by his own admission, came to the meeting with Mr. Buchholz selected.

5. An email was sent to several members of the council by Mr. Buchholz discussing the open position. This email was not made part of the council packet or public record before the meeting.

6. Mr. Poeschl, after the recess, gave his 'youthfulness' as the only reason to select Mr. Buchholz (who, according to his resume started his career in 1975).

From these facts, we know: A negative quorum was made when Mr. Palmeri and Mr. Poeschl discussed who to appoint. This is because Palmeri and McHugh had both indicated their choice. If Mr. Palmeri did, as it appears, try to convince Mr. Poeschl to also support Mr. Buchholz, Mr. Palmeri created a negative quroum, as three votes is enough to block any nominee. If Mr. Palmeri had the discussion with Mr. Poeschl on microphone in the open meeting, there would have been no violation.

Things we suspect:

1. Mr Poeschl really did not know who he was going to vote for going into the meeting. He should not have spoken to Mr. Palmeri, creating the negative quorum, but it was Mr. Palmeri who had previously stated who he supported that caused the problem.

2. Presumably Mr. Palmeri had a reason to select Mr. Buchholz that he did not want to mention in open session that he discussed with Mr. Poeschl in recess.

3. Mr's Palmeri, Esslinger and McHugh all came to the meeting with Mr. Buchholz as their selection. Mr. Buchholz did have contact with each of them outside of the meeting (which is legal), but did they have contact with each other? They all seemed pretty sure of their selection, with two giving indication they had Mr. Buchholz selected before they hit their seats at the meeting.

4. The whole matter stinks. It seems to me that Mr. Poeschl is caught up in some manuvering that he may not have been party to until the suspect recess.

Someone on the council needs to come clean about the process, or more research into pre-meeting correspondence and recess discussions needs to be done.

Poeschl, Palmeri - Caucus or Open Meeting Violation?

Last night, the Oshkosh Common Council selected a new member.

In a long process Harold Buchholz was selected on the first ballot with 4 of the needed 6 votes.

The process worked like this:

1. Presentations from candidates
2. Comments from citizens (there were none)
3. Council discussion
4. Council polling for candidate nomination

The council discussion worked like this:

1. Palmeri says he would select Buchholz
2. Tower selects Hintz
3. McHugh selects Buchholz
*4. Poeschl asks for a recess to think over his selection - selects Buchholz after.
5. King selects Hintz
6. Esslinger selects Buchholz
7. Buchholz wins 4-2

* Let's talk about the recess and review a few things about open meetings.

A negative quorum exists when enough members of the council have come together to block a vote outside of the open meeting. In this case, 4 votes were needed to pass the candidate. That means that 3 votes (out of the 6 councilors) could block the nomination of any of the candidates.

After Palmeri and McHugh selected Buchholz, they were in effect 'off the table'. However, when Poeschl asked for 5 minutes to think over his selection, he immediately began a discussion with Palmeri that lasted the entire break.

During this discussion, they repeatedly referred to Poeschl's notes. All of this took place off-camera and away from the eyes and ears of Oshkosh citizens.

In other words, it was against open meetings rules.

They created a negative quorum as soon as Poeschl decided to also support Palmeri's choice.

How public will the process really be?

Here is the OshNW article about the (already) confusing appointment process for the Oshkosh Common Council seat.

Looking at the time frame from the article:

The newly elected city council met for the first time Tuesday afternoon to discuss the process. With the hopes of soliciting public input on the issue, the matter was pushed back to the May 12 meeting.

and

Councilors who favored the application process also suggested accepting letters of interest and resumes for a one- to two-week period, which would likely lead to a vote to fill the position in the last week of May.

So, they want to decide how to fill the position on May 12th. Then have the appointment on May 26th - two weeks to the day later.

This doesn't really leave a lot of time for the application and interview process. It would seem to me that there is really only time to review people you already know in that time.

If you give 2 weeks to submit the application, then the appointment would need to be moved into June.

I think this could easily turn into a railroad. We need to keep our eyes on the process and actions closely.

Is this truly an open application process, or a thin veil to put over a selection that has already been made?

We will be monitoring...

I was gonna blog about the Oshkosh Mayoral election...

...but the Chief has said it better than I could.

A Thought About Tomorrow's Oshkosh Mayor's Race...

Candidate Paul Esslinger will still be on the council if he looses.

Mayor Frank Tower will be off the council if he looses.

So, should Mr. Esslinger win, would it not be fair for him to appoint Mr. Tower to the council?

Vote for Frank Tower anyway...