'Big Bird' joins AARP in telling Obama, Don't mention us

In last week's Romney/Obama debate, President Obama proudly referred to AARP* as supportive to his ObamaCare plan. After the debate, AARP promptly said, 'don't mention us again': "“While we respect the rights of each campaign to make its case to voters, AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any candidate or political campaign,” the group posted in a statement. “AARP is a nonpartisan organization and we do not endorse political candidates nor coordinate with any candidate or political party.”"

Now that statement is pretty remarkable, since AARP sold out its members by supporting ObamaCare in the first place! But now that the bloom is clearly off the ObamaCare rose and Obama presidency, AARP is requesting Obama not to refer to them again. Thanks a lot, AARP. You pushed for the legislation, got the equivalent of a waiver for yourself, and now you don't want to be associated with Obama and ObamaCare?

In that same debate, when talking about how to deal with Obama's unbridled spending, adding a trillion+ dollars to the debt a year, Romney gave the example of cutting unnecessary spending. Since PBS's Jim Lehrer was the moderator, Mitt Romney mentioned discontinuing taxpayer subsidies to PBS, as one example of wasteful spending.

Romney said, "I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to — I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That's number one."

Well, after that debate, President Obama jumped on Romney's nixing Big Bird as a campaign issue. He talked about it on the stump. His campaign quickly cooked up an absurd campaign ad featuring Big Bird! Trouble is, like AARP, "Big Bird, it seems, isn't thrilled about his cameo in the presidential race."

In fact, "The folks at Sesame Street are asking the Obama campaign to pull down a TV ad released Tuesday that mocks Mitt Romney for vowing to yank the subsidy to PBS." the "Sesame Workshop, a nonprofit educational organization that produces and owns the show, issued a statement Tuesday saying [like AARP], “we do not endorse candidates or participate in political campaigns. We have approved no campaign ads, and as is our general practice, have requested that the ad be taken down.”

The CEO of Sesame Workshop, Sherrie Westin, stated on CNN that "the Sesame Workshop receives very little funding from PBS".  Apparently, they are able to fund their programing through selling licensed products, donors, and corporate underwriting/sponsorship. Westin does not like Big Bird being the poster child bird for public funding.

The bigger picture here is why is President Obama and his campaign fixating on Big Bird and not the real issues crippling our economy and threatening our nation?

Romney summed it up nicely yesterday,  ""You have to scratch your head when the president spends the last week talking about saving Big Bird," he said. "I actually think we need to have a president who talks about saving the American people and saving good jobs.""

Maybe Obama is hoping you will be thinking about Big Bird instead of why the White House's Benghazi narrative differs so from the under oath State Department testimony. (You mean the attack wasn't a spontaneous response to that anti-Muslim video?)



*Many people, in the past, joined AARP so they could enjoy the travel-related discounts, however, there are many other organizations that provide the same benefits. I am a AAA member; others have joined organizations such as AMAC, a conservative alternative to AARP

1st Debate Transcript 
1st Debate: Romney Presidential, capable, Obama? ...clearly 'a drag'


AARP to Obama: Don't mention us again
How AARP's support for ObamaCare was bought and paid for
After AARP gets 'waiver' from Obamacare, conservative groups fight for information, answers "“It’s payoff time to the AARP (some call it bribery) for selling out seniors and endorsing Obamacare, an awful proposal which makes no sense to seniors who know it’s bad medicine for them,” Martin said in a statement."

Big Bird Wants Out of Campaign Ad

State Department reveals new details of Benghazi attack
Middle East unrest: Romney? presidential, Obama? busy campaigning

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation, The Way <><

Marquette poll: Walker up 7%, but what about voter fraud?

One would have to be living under a rock to not know the eyes of the nation are upon Wisconsin's Walker recall election on June 5th. It's not often the Weekly Standard covers our elections in such detail: Tom Barrett Fires Blanks at Scott Walker... and Barrett Can't Name Any Schools Hurt by Walker....

Emotions are running high with campaign ads bombarding the airwaves, the mailbox stuffed with politician post cards, and political phone calls (live and robo) taunting us from morning to night. Everyone in Wisconsin who votes needs to vote for 2 separate races: Governor AND Lt. Governor. For me that would be Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch. In areas where there is also a State Senate recall, they will need to vote for State Senator too. Without our Republican Senators holding their seats, Wisconsin can forget any major legislation passing. (Margins are already razor thin--remember the jobs creating mining bill defeat?)

One thing is for certain--I think we will all breathe a sigh of relief when this is over. I hope I will be smiling when the results are in. 

But turnout is key to a Walker win. Though the latest Marquette University Law School poll shows Walker at 52% to Barrett's 45%, with a margin of error of +/- 4.1% points, I am very concerned about the percentage of fraudulent votes cast for Barrett. So we have to outvote the fraud. If you want to help get out the vote in support of the Governor, the GOP Victory Centers are still looking for people to man the phones from 9am - 9pm to make calls from now through Tuesday.

Now if we had our Voter ID law in place, I would be breathing a little easier right now. But with reports of the huge numbers of early voting going on by the busload in Madison and Milwaukee, including Memorial Day, I am uneasy. They usually say Republicans need to outvote Democrats by about 2% to counter voter fraud. In this recall election, I think that percentage will be much higher. Let's face it, without a photo ID, casting a vote at a City Hall--as someone other than yourself--is much easier than at the poll on election day, where poll workers are often familiar with the voters in their wards.

Interestingly, one of the questions from the Marquette poll was about Voter ID, "Sixty-one percent favored requiring a government-issued photo id to vote, while 37 percent opposed that."

One portion of the poll leaves me wondering, who are these people?, because in an unrelated question, Obama gained ground: "The presidential vote among likely voters moved to 51 percent for Obama and 43 percent for Romney. In the May 9-12 poll, the race was tied 46-46 percent. "

On the jobs front, the facts are in: Wisconsin gained jobs under Scott Walker. And if Walker is reelected, more hiring should follow. In a quarterly survey conducted by Nicolet Bank Business Pulse of CEOs and business leaders in northern Wisconsin during the week of May 10th - 17th, 91% of those CEOs viewed a Walker win positively, reflected by comments such as "Wisconsin's business climate will improve" and "Businesses will hire more people and invest in their business"  vs. 93% negative view of a Barrett win with themes that included "Business climate will worsen, few businesses will come to Wisconsin and some will leave", and "Business will hold tight on any aggressive growth of their business."

Locally, while at the Target/Trader Joe's Underwood Crossing Dedication ceremony last Thursday, I asked a Ryan Corp. worker about the Jr. Anchor store that would be east of the Target store. Last I heard, it was to be a home-oriented store and was hoping they were ready to announce the store name. But instead, I learned that they backed out, as did one of the smaller retailers in the multi-store building between Trader Joe's and PNC Bank.

I mentioned the uncertainty over our recall election might have influenced these 2 retailers to pull out--that until businesses know which direction Wisconsin is going in, they don't feel they can make a commitment? Would our state turn from our current more business friendly state to a higher tax, more regulation and a return of combined reporting state. The man from Ryan didn't disagree.

Lastly, the Wisconsin Faith & Freedom Coalition mailed out a campaign Voter Guide that included 6  campaign issues not mentioned much in the press: 1. Abortion on Demand, 2. Taxpayer-funded Abortion, 3. Same-sex Marriage, and 4. New Taxes on Wisconsin Families, all of which Walker OPPOSES and Barrett SUPPORTS and 5. Parental Choice in Education, and 6. Eliminating the Death Tax, which Walker SUPPORTS and Barrett OPPOSES.

And speaking of faith, I know Christians* have been praying for our legislators, during these trying times and for this recall election. The Governor himself has asked for prayer, "pray for me--pray for my family and particularly for the next four weeks". So I am. I'm praying for God's protection for all the candidates, for justice--for right to prevail, and I'm pleading for mercy for our state and nation... according to God's will.

*Christians are directed in the New Testament of the Bible to respect and honor government representatives and authorities in Romans 13: 1-7 and to pray for them in 1 Timothy 2: 1-8. I am not familiar with the teachings of other religions on this topic. 

More Reading:

Marquette University Law School Polls

Walker says feds approve higher Wis. Job numbers

Nicolet Bank Business Pulse: CEOs say Recall will significantly impact business

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

My April 3, 2012 ballot picks: Grant, Sutton, Wolfla, Lowerr, Lambert, Wartman

Tuesday, April 3, 2012, is Election Day in Wisconsin. We vote in the Presidential primary and for local non-partisan races. Click to view larger photo.

It is doubtful that our recently passed Voter ID law will be in effect, however, you will be required to sign the Poll List when you vote.

You can find your sample ballot anywhere in Wisconsin simply by putting in your address at this website: Wisconsin Voter Public Access Find your polling place here.

Polls open at 7am and close at 8pm. District 7 voters, remember we vote in at St. Luke's Catholic Church on Greenfield Ave. and Davidson Rd. in District 6.

Take the time to be an informed voter. If you don't know anything about a candidate, don't vote in that race. The Wisconsin Conservatives - Vote April 3rd! site is a good source for many races in the southeastern quadrant of Wisconsin.

Most of the races on our ballots in Brookfield are uncontested, meaning the candidate will win regardless of your vote. I still cast a vote for some of these people if I support their candidacy; I don't if I don't know much about them or don't support them.

Going from the general to the specific on the front page of the ballot:

Party Preference: You must select a party for the Presidential Primary. For me that is Republican. (Last time, since McCain cinched the nomination, I selected Democrat and voted for Hillary, believing she was the less radical choice should she win!)

Presidential Preference Vote - I am voting for Rick Santorum. Considering his shoe-string budget campaign, I am impressed he is doing as well as he is with Romney outspending him 4 - 7 times to 1, depending on the state. More than likely, by the end of April, if not on Tuesday, results will show Mitt Romney will be our nominee in November, but I still am voting for Rick. His candidacy has made Romney a better candidate as Santorum pushes him more to the right. 2012 Primary Election Schedule

County Races:
Waukesha County Board Supervisor: District 7 - Jennifer Grant She is running in the only contested County Board race in Brookfield in some northern Wards of our city. Jennifer Grant contacted me 2 months ago and we have emailed back and forth a bit. She explained, "I am running because I truly believe that we are at a crossroads and it is time for even the Waukesha County Board to represent conservative fiscal policy and reduce taxes (we are a red county after all). As a CPA and Benefits professional, I think I have the private sector experience needed for the position."

Jennifer Grant is endorsed by my State Assembly Representative Dale Kooyenga and the Menomonee Falls Taxpayer Association. She would get my vote too, but I live south of her district.

Jennifer Grant for Waukesha County Supervisor
Menomonee Falls Patch: April 2012 Election: Jennifer Grant

The other County Board races in Brookfield are uncontested. I am not voting for Tom Schellinger in County District 20. Possibly next time, in 2014, we will have a choice in southern Brookfield.

Municipal Races: City of Brookfield Aldermen

District 1 - Incumbent Dan Sutton - Though I don't live in District 1, if I did, I would be voting for Dan Sutton. He has been my ballot pick before mainly because he supports the residents and has good instincts. Retired Judge Dick Steinberg is challenging him this April. I do appreciate and thank Judge Steinberg for all the years he spent on the bench in Brookfield, but I would leave it at that. Dan Sutton is very popular in his district and he should be reelected.

BrookfieldNOW Alderman District 1 race

District 4 - Cathy Wolfla over Appointee Buck Jurken - I'm thinking I would vote for Cathy Wolfla if I lived in District 4. She seems to be very interested in keeping constituents informed on the issues, something I really appreciate with my 2 Aldermen Renee' Lowerr and Lisa Mellone. I also liked her last line in the BrookfieldNOW profile, "I am open to listening to what the residents think about bond issues and "specialty taxes," but ultimately, we must balance what we can have with what we can afford to pay." Now that is a refreshing concept!

BrookfieldNOW Alderman District 4 race
Brookfield Patch: Aldermanic Election: Wolfla Promises Greater Input; Jurken Touts Record

District 7 - Renee Lowerr - I have lived in District 7 for 26 years, and by this time, I know a good Alderman when I see one! Renee Lowerr takes her job as Alderman very seriously. She is hard working, energetic, listens to her constituents, and does not have divided loyalties. Her focus is on what is best for her constituents and the City of Brookfield. She is very sensitive to residents concerns with new development.

Her challenger is Tom Schellinger, who is and will be our County Board Supervisor. He was our Alderman from 2002 - 2006, but was voted out of office by Lisa Mellone in 2006 and by Renee Lowerr in 2008. Schellinger's performance aside, I believe serving in both positions would be a conflict of interest.

The thing that troubles me is that new to the district residents don't know the issues we have had with him in the past and might believe the very misleading campaign literature he distributed against Lowerr. I do hope they will do some research before voting.

Schellinger sinks to new low with misleading campaign literature, Vote Renee Lowerr!

Conflict of interest? Schellinger for County Supervisor & Brookfield Alderman with left-over Schellinger for Assembly signs

Brookfield Patch: Aldermanic Election: Challenged by Schellinger, Lowerr Focuses on Development
BrookfieldNOW: Brookfield 7th Aldermanic District

District 7 - Lisa Mellone - Lisa again is unopposed as she runs for the remainder of her term, but she does deserve our vote. I will quote my 2010 ballot pick post: "...she deserves mention as an outstanding Alderman. What a pleasant change from our former Alderman [Schellinger] often referred to as "Mr. Rolodex". Lisa Mellone works very hard for her district and follows through on resident concerns. Some day, I hope to draw that little connecting arrow next to her name for Mayor of Brookfield!"

Come back, Lisa Mellone, District 7 needs you!

For School District of Elmbrook School Board races, you must turn your ballot over. Everyone in the Elmbrook School District votes for both school board races, regardless of where you live in the district.

Area IV - Jean Lambert - Her background as a senior financial analyst for Froedert Health makes her a great asset to the board. She is a 40 year resident with 30 years private sector experience and 3 years on the Elmbrook School Board.

Jean Lambert summed it up well in Elmbrook incumbents face challengers: "'I'm running because we have, for the past couple of years, done a lot of heavy lifting with regards to Act 10 and decisions about Open Enrollment and the closing of Hillside,' Lambert said. 'Now we can concentrate on student achievement, acclimating the new superintendent and building our school communities as we have needed to redistrict.'"

At-Large - Meg Wartman - I have supported Meg Wartman in past elections, and I support her now. She, like Jean Lambert, has been a solid vote against adding expensive 4K to Elmbrook. Meg Wartman has lived in the district for 25 years and has served on the board 3 terms as treasurer, President, and Vice President. Her experience has helped her to understand that adding more students through Open Enrollment, 220, or even 4K does not help our district but rather just adds more cost to the taxpayers. Meg Wartman is one of that collective "we" Jean spoke of in the above quote. They have done heavy lifting. They have made tough decisions and our Elmbrook School District and the Elmbrook taxpayers are the better for it.

Please see 2012 Elmbrook School District election picks: Meg Wartman & Jean Lambert for more details from the Candidate Forum

So, there you have it: My ballot picks for April 3rd. Be sure to look into the issues and candidates for yourself and vote. Each of the links to postings I did on these candidates has numerous links to more articles and postings.


Voter guide to conservatives on southeast Wisconsin ballots


Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Schellinger sinks to new low in campaigning: misleading literature, Vote Renee Lowerr!

I didn't think Tom Schellinger could surprise me anymore with the lengths he would go to win an election, but I was wrong! First, he has his ubiquitous generic Vote Schellinger signs that come out every spring election season, some that still bear the stickers from his run for Assembly rather than Alderman.

When he ran for mayor in 2006, he declined taking part in the candidate Q&A forum our neighborhood hosted, but then showed up, while in progress, expecting to be given time to make a speech and avoid any questions!

In 2008, when running against Renee' Lowerr (to regain his lost Aldermanic seat) he violated campaign sign rules by planting 5 signs on one lawn across from our polling place. One homeowner in the area said he did not ask permission. That stunt prompted me to write Shame on you, Schellinger: illegally placed signs.

But this time, Tom Schellinger has gone too far, in my opinion. He has distributed very misleading campaign fliers, inferring his opponent Renee' Lowerr voted for controversial measures on the council before she even became an alderman!

The first side of his flier just says, Vote Schellinger, but then adds, Republican Alderman for District 7. Never mind spring elections are supposed to be non-partisan races.

I called our Waukesha County District Attorney Brad Schimel about this and the misleading information included on Schellinger's flier. When I mentioned the candidate was Tom Schellinger, he did say "I am used to hearing his name... he does seem to run for everything." Schimel said it is a violation to knowingly put in false information on campaign literature, but proving it is the problem. He then added, it's kind of unethical to put in party affiliation, but it is not against the rules. These elections are supposed to be non-partisan. Yet Schellinger touts his Republicanism on both sides of his flier. On the back side, he infers Lowerr is not Republican by stating, "Vote for a Republican Alderman..." May I say that I will be; I'll be voting for Renee' Lowerr.

While it is true that it is difficult to prove someone is willingly trying to mislead the voters, I would like to at least share some of the facts surrounding the 3 development issues he raises on the back of his flier. Then you, the voter, can decide for yourself.

Issue 1 - Fire Station 3: Schellinger states, "Fire Station 3 was moved out of District 7. A move I would have voted against. In an emergency every second counts! I support tornado warning sirens."

To me, this infers Renee Lowerr voted for or supported the move, except for the fact she was not elected to the Council until April 1, 2008! The move was voted on Oct. 3, 2007. Alderman Lisa Mellone (she defeated Schellinger in 2006) voted no. Since this was BEFORE Lowerr was elected, our other District 7 Alderman was Mike Franz. He voted FOR the move. It was no wonder I blogged, "Sadly, my other district 7 alderman, Mike Franz, voted yes. Yes, to his own district 7 residents soon to have the longest EMS response times in the city. I sure hope someone is considering running for district 7 alderman next spring. We need another alderman who will represent US and our interests."

Renee' Lowerr was at that fire station council meeting and emailed me this report: "The meeting was well attended by mostly Greenfield Heights Residents... I believe that I [Renee Lowerr] was the only resident East of Calhoun that spoke about re-considering their Fire Station move vote & rebuild at current location [on Moorland]." And I am happy to report that Renee Lowerr did step forward the following spring to run for Alderman and won... against Schellinger.

Issue 2 - The former Sentry store, now vacant lot on Calhoun and Greenfield: Here Schellinger writes, "Alderperson Renee Lowerr helped derail this development on Calhoun and Greenfield costing the city thousands of dollars in tax revenue and robbing the neighborhood of the convenience of walking to shops, restaurants, and other services. Was it because Renee's back yard is located right along the lot line?"

Now, it is true that Renee' Lowerr filed a protest petition against the first Deer Creek Plaza shopping mall plan at that location, not because it was in her back yard, but because it was of that Modified Suburban Overlay design that placed the store in the front of the lot and the parking at the back. This was in 2003, 5 years BEFORE Lowerr ran for Alderman and won. This MSO arrangement was objectionable to the neighbors living along the lot line because it put the public in such close proximity to their private property, unlike the former Sentry with its loading dock at the back. Incidentally, the developer wanted to build it in the traditional design; the city was the one mandating the 2020 Master Plan MSO.

Renee got a vast majority of her neighborhood to sign the petition, presented it to the Common Council, and the Council voted to REJECT that plan 11 to 1. Tom Schellinger was one of the votes that voted AGAINST it, thus "derailing" that development. Renee' Lowerr became legendary for she was one of the first people to fight City Hall over unwanted development and win.

Please note that this neighborhood built or bought their homes with the Sentry grocery store in their backyards. Again, it wasn't the development that was a problem, it was the configuration of the MSO with public parking so close to their lot lines.

Another plan was brought forward, with some expensive options, but the developer couldn't afford to build it for the rent estimates. In June of 2005, the developer came forward with a more modest plan, but the Plan Commission wouldn't approve it. There was something on the Common Council Agenda and approved in Dec. 2007 for the strip mall, this time in the traditional configuration of stores in back/parking in front. From the Council Minutes: "• P.C. #3: JBK Properties, Inc., for approval of new plan and method of operation for construction of two buildings...retail space...at the NE corner of S. Calhoun Road and W. Greenfield Avenue...Deer Creek Plaza."

Renee Lowerr was in favor of those other strip malls in her backyard. She was not alderman at the time. If we are pointing fingers, I think the Plan Commission, with their extras, and the 2008 recession are really to blame. I referred to this project in Another planned Brookfield project falls through in 2009.

Issue 3 - The Target Store at former Quebecor site on 124th and Bluemound: Schellinger asks, "Would you want this massive Target store in your backyard? As long as it was not in her own backyard, Renee Lowerr thought so! She voted to put it in someone else's backyard." Schellinger's statement here shows how out of touch he is with this neighborhood, because most residents actually are in favor of the project.

First of all, Renee Lowerr wasn't even an alderman when this project was originally approved over 6 years ago. Since then, Alderman Lisa Mellone, and Alderman Renee Lowerr (when she was elected) have worked in cooperation with the Columbia Gardens neighborhood that adjoins the development. (Photo depicts Columbia Blvd. with development on left and neighborhood on right.)

But even before Lowerr was elected, when the neighbors met at a Plan Commission meeting in 2006, "they were in favor of the property being redeveloped". They did have concerns: #1 restricting development traffic from their neighborhood, #2 keeping the berm on Columbia, #3 preference to condo over apartments and #4 "fear that the retail will remain vacant due to the glut in the retail space already available in Brookfield."

Fast forward 6 years to the present, and those concerns have been eliminated or dealt with: #1 development traffic cannot enter directly into the neighborhood, #2 the berm is being kept and in fact, enhanced, #3 there are no more apartments or condos included in the project, and #4 the retail involved here is very popular: Target and Trader Joes. The 3rd largest retailer has something to do with home goods/products, but has not been announced yet.

As for the accusation that Target is in these resident's backyards, not so. I drove down Columbia Blvd. to see for myself. (Above photo was taken closer to Bluemound on Columbia. Use tan area, where water main excavation was done, as a reference point.) There are 5 homes facing the street adjoining the project (to the left of the street) So there is the street, then grass, then sidewalk/bike path, a berm with trees (more evergreens are to be planted), then parking lot space, and finally the Target store side! And not one Vote Schellinger sign. Wouldn't you think if these people were so upset with their current aldermen they would be supporting their old one?

His last salvo is "Our current Alderpersons are in alignment with developers as long as it's not in their own backyard. Are they representing District 7?" He then urges you to vote for NEW leadership, vote for a Republican...

Don't these statements make it seem that Schellinger opposed development that residents were opposed to when he was an alderman? Well, that certainly is not true if you look at his record.

A quick Google to some past issues I was following show he voted for Capitol Heights, a real heart breaker for District 2. When I voiced my concerns to him over adding 2 restaurants and 2 stores in the parking lot of Brookfield Square, creating more traffic on Bluemound and Moorland in his district, his reply was, You should see the traffic in Europe! He voted in favor of the Gateway corner buildings of Brookfield Square, which was a TIF #3 district by the way. (So much for his concern about lost tax revenues at Deer Creek Plaza on Calhoun and Greenfield from Issue #1.)

How about development approvals since he was voted out of office? Lisa Mellone and Renee Lowerr voted against the Hooters. Before Lowerr was elected, Lisa Mellone opposed the over-sized Fountain Brook Crossing on Moorland and Greenfield. (I also objected.)

And what about the implication that neither one of our aldermen, Lisa Mellone or Renee Lowerr are representing the residents in our District 7?

Here I will take you back to the year 2004. Area residents near Kinsey Park strongly objected to the prospect of the Greenway Corridor bike-path/road--cutting through our small, park and woods. This path literally was in one resident's back yard! Tom Schellinger was our Alderman at the time and also Chairman of the Greenway Corridor. He wanted the trail; residents did not. We organized, and having heard of a woman in the 6th district who fought City Hall and won in 2003 (that was Renee Lowerr), we had some hope of succeeding.

After a lot of hard work holding neighborhood meetings, leafleting the neighborhood, writing letters to the editor, contacting all the aldermen and Park & Rec members, circulating petitions, and speaking before the park department and Common Council, we prevailed with a narrow 7 - 6 victory. As with Lowerr and her protest petition, we weren't sure of Schellinger's support the night of the vote. Schellinger very reluctantly sided with our neighborhood.

So why all this about Schellinger? Because I value hard work. Renee' Lowerr and Lisa Mellone take their job as Aldermen very seriously. They respond to resident questions and complaints. They work with developers and neighborhoods to make sure zoning is followed and resident concerns are addressed. They represent us. And they work well together.

I can't say the same for Tom Schellinger. He can't even be bothered to fill out a candidate info sheet or make sure his signs have the proper office listed on them. The Patch did an article on Aldermanic Election: Challenged by Schellinger, Lowerr Focuses on Development, and he "did not make himself available for an interview"! It seems he is always looking for a short-cut, the easy way out. And that is about how devoted he was to his job as Alderman in the past.

In 2008 I wrote this about Renee' Lowerr in my ballot picks post: "Very energetic, hard worker, and I think will be sensitive to neighborhoods regarding development since she had her own NIMBY experience." My opinion hasn't changed. She has my enthusiastic support this time. I hope she has yours as well.

Incumbents are not noted on our ballots. Schellinger is first, then Renee Lowerr.

Past Posts:
Mayoral Q&A a SUCCESS, and a SURPRISE! 2006
Shame on you, Schellinger: illegally placed signs 2008
What a heartbreaker! Mayor breaks tie to move fire station #3
Another planned Brookfield project falls through (Deer Creek Plaza, another revised version approved)
The good old boys: desperate to protect their power ("council blindly approves everything that comes along... Schellinger...stated regrets for approving Capitol Heights")
Oh goodie! More traffic, water guzzling restaurants, and another specialty grocer... 2005
Connectivity will make neighborhood streets a racetrack Oct. 2006
Brookfield's proposed Target Store Public Hearing: Dec. 7, 2010, UPDATE & Maps
Hope things go well for Target / Trader Joe's Jan. 2012 post on Neighborhood meeting
Come back, Lisa Mellone, District 7 needs you!
How about merit pay for aldermen? "...since Lisa Mellone replaced Tom Schellinger in 2006, we finally have an active voice at City Hall and someone down here who will look into and act on a problem. Lisa devotes a lot of time and effort toward being an alderman."


Posts from this election cycle:
Conflict of interest? Schellinger for County Supervisor & Brookfield Alderman with left-over Schellinger for Assembly signs
Voter guide to conservatives on southeast Wisconsin ballots

BrookfieldNOW: Brookfield 7th Aldermanic District Voter Guide
Brookfield Patch: Renee Lowerr Profile
Brookfield Patch: Tom Schellinger I'll save you the trouble. He "Did not respond"
Aldermanic Election: Challenged by Schellinger, Lowerr Focuses on Development

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Voter guide to conservatives on southeast Wisconsin ballots

Election day is just a few days away now. Hopefully, you have been following the candidates running in your area, but sometimes, it is difficult to garner the information you need to make an informed decision when voting. Since these are non-partisan races, how do you know who is the more conservative choice?

If you live in the southeast corner of Wisconsin, you can take a look at the Wisconsin Conservatives - Vote April 3rd! Voter Guide*. It covers School Board Candidates, County Races, and Municipal Races, where identified Conservatives are running, from Appleton to Kenosha. There is even a spot to leave a comment on each of these web pages.

I live in Brookfield. So on this voter guide, my Elmbrook School Board incumbents Wartman and Lambert are named as the conservative choices. I heartily concur. In the County Races section, the only contested Waukesha County Supervisor race for us is for District 7 in northeastern Brookfield (also includes southeast Menomoneee Falls, Butler). The Voter Guide picks Jennifer Grant. She is endorsed by my State Assembly Representative Dale Kooyenga and the Menomonee Falls Taxpayer Association. She would get my vote too, but I live south of her district. Our Municipal Aldermen are not on the guide, but in the 3 contested races, I would pick Dan Sutton in District 1 and Renee Lowerr in my District 7. I know Lowerr to be Conservative.

For those living in Milwaukee County, the important Milwaukee County Conservative Candidates are listed:

• Milwaukee Comptroller: Bunting
• Milwaukee Judge 17: Nelson Phillips - JudgeNelsonPhillips.com
  
• Milwaukee 1: Cegielski
• Milwaukee 9: Taylor
• Milwaukee 11: Borkowski
• Milwaukee 17: Sanfelippo
• Milwaukee 18: Alexander

So keep doing your homework and then go vote on Tuesday, April 3, 2012. Polls open at 7am and close at 8pm.

It is unlikely Voter ID will be in place, but one part of the law stands: You must sign the Poll List before you vote.


*My thanks to Conservative Blogger Randy Melchert for his part in compiling this extensive voters guide!

More Reading:
2012 Elmbrook School District election picks: Meg Wartman & Jean Lambert
Jennifer Grant 4 Supervisor
Jennifer Grant for Waukesha County Supervisor
Hope Judge Nelson Phillips prevails on Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2012 Primary Election Milwaukee County
Judge Nelson Phillips Endorsements


Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

2012 Elmbrook School District election picks: Meg Wartman & Jean Lambert

On March 23rd, I attended the Elmbrook School District candidate forum Q&A. It was a great opportunity to compare the views and style of incumbents Meg Wartman (At-large) and Jean Lambert (Area IV) with their opponents Lynn Thomas and Paul Byrne. The following posting is my account of a few highlights from the forum.

This is written from my point of view and answers are taken primarily from the notes I took at the meeting. Italicized comments are pretty close to what was said, though not necessarily a direct quote. Comments in parenthesis are my filling in the blanks.

If you have cable TV, I encourage you to watch the forum for yourself on Time Warner 13 & 96 at 7am, 5pm and 11pm every day.

Bottom line? Meg Wartman and Jean Lambert are against adding 4K; Thomas and Byrne are in favor of adding this costly program. Wartman and Lambert are against adding more Open Enrollment / 220 students; Thomas and Byrne seemed more open to Open Enrollment. Closing Tonawanda is not an issue. (More on this below.)

Usually there are few surprises at these events, but Meg Wartman, first to give her opening remarks, pleasantly surprised me after her opening statement chronicling how she lived in the district 25 years and served on the board 9 years as Treasurer, President, and Vice President. Then she happily reported that in the past, forum questions centered around budget cuts (what to cut--how to meet budget shortfalls), but this year, those (budget cut questions) weren't the topics! I thought, now that is a refreshing change.

I wish I could say the pleasant mood continued, but challenger Lynn Thomas spoke next. She began well enough, saying she would bring a new perspective to the board as it shifts from finances to curriculum and that her experience as a private school teacher and mother of 2 young children would help.

Then Thomas made everyone sit up and take notice when she switched her campaign mode voice to what I can only call very emphatic, controlled anger--a slow boil--as she said she was deeply disappointed by the tone around her candidacy in regard to some emails circulating and blogs (not mine) bringing politics into this forum. She concluded by slapping her hands (or table, I couldn't see her from where I sat) to emphasize her point. I have never heard any candidate speak that way in a forum before. There was an uncomfortable moment that followed, and I wondered if she realized her performance would be playing on cable broadcast for all the world to see.

Jean Lambert put things back on track. She opened with, I have a lot to offer... and she does. Lambert believes they need to work on student achievement and continued fiscal policy--balanced budget, among other issues. Her experience in the private sector as a senior financial analyst for Froedert Health makes Jean a great asset to the board.

Paul Bryne, self described Milwaukee native, stated he went to private and public schools. He currently works for a company in Racine and is an Elm Grove resident. He wants Elmbrook to be competitive and stressed transparency at the board level.

Question #2: Do you support the state changes in relation to Act 10? All 4 candidates said they did, more or less.

Jean Lambert answered 1st: I am supportive of provisions of Act 10. Then she added that what it has done for us is positive. That we came from the point of budgetary struggle, and we are not at that point anymore. It enabled us to sit at the table with the teachers to talk about issues directly, instead of through a 3rd party. I look forward to working together to build a stronger district.

Paul Bryne answered that it changed the nature of relationships. The negative being that you have also taken away incentive for a long career in one district, our teachers could be poached.

I would add that this is where free market principles come into play, even though it is a taxpayer funded position. Elmbrook can, and often does, offer a better pay scale. Benefits can be used as an incentive. And certainly, most teachers would rather teach in a prestigious district such as Elmbrook rather than in an economically or academically struggling district.

Meg Wartman expressed wholehearted support by saying, I too support Act 10. Then she mentioned the cost savings achieved: $3.8 million, $1.7 million, $2.3 million, and $80,000 in short term savings, adding up to around $7 million total. I don't know where we would have cut that... it saved teachers' jobs and classroom size. Before (Act 10) 85% of cost was for staffing and we couldn't make a dent in that...

Now it was Lynn Thomas' turn. What would she say after her opening remarks? Thomas said, I agree with Paul, ...the former model was unsustainable. But be mindful of the demoralizing effect this had on teachers. She believes they need to develop a strategy to retain teachers.

Question #3: Regarding the number of Open Enrollment and Chapter 220 students, increase or decrease?

Paul Byrne: I can't say. Open Enrollment & 220 is good for taxpayers because they get credit (on property tax bills) but (it) doesn't help the students. He says, District 1st: Structure the district for people in our district, ...but using excess space is good. We're at a reasonable rate of 8 - 10%. (If we have more room) we should take them.

Meg Wartman: In our opening remarks, we all said we moved here because... If we give lots of other options to those not living here, there are costs to that. We haven't taken any 220 for past few years, I would keep it that.

Then Wartman made a surprising statement, at least to me, because I have been saying this for years. We really don't get any net gain on open enrollment students... maybe $1,000? ...not profitable...

Lynn Thomas: I understand the focus on district students, we spent a premium to be here, but we don't want higher class sizes. (She favors) limited non-resident enrollment as place holders, so (we don't need to) close and open schools.

Jean Lambert: No 220 and Open (Enrollment). We (are the) primary taxpayer (in our district.) Focus on our students, our residents, not state tax funding. I believe Jean was saying, Elmbrook should keep its focus on its district students.

Me: I believe projections indicate there won't be any need for quite some time to open schools! Elmbrook is a donor district. Adding students is not a money maker for our district as it may be in other districts.

Question #7: What are your thoughts on 4K, does it have an educational value?

Paul Byrne: I am strongly for 4K. Finding child's weak spots early on...4K is a soft-start...its an advantage. It helps us be competitive--future residents will look at this.

Me: No, they look at the overall quality of the district. See What? Families who HAVE 4K petition to join Elmbrook WITHOUT 4K? Elmbrook does offer early screening to help residents catch some of those weak spots.

Meg Wartman: I have not supported 4K. (And I agree, she has not; she has been strongly against it for years.) Then she again surprised me with, One reason districts start it (4K) is for financial reasons. Their funding comes more from state taxes not property taxes, but our funding would come directly from property taxes. Other kids need an early start, but Elmbrook has other excellent opportunities. (Private 4K offerings)

Frankly, we haven't seen a dip that others talk of, families continue to (move into the Elmbrook District).

Lynn Thomas: I'm strongly supportive of 4K. I did research. Our duty as a district is to offer it. If Elmbrook offered it would be excellent. ....I have reservations for the cost to taxpayers but it would make our community more competitive.

Jean Lambert: I've studied 4K for many years, (her children) had 4K in private school. I would have to beg to differ with the research (which shows it to be some benefit to poor children). Our students at our (upper) socio-economic level, they have advantages. (Implying they don't need 4K.)

Then Jean added an important factor: I don't think we need to take this (4K) away from private schools (private sector jobs) and put it on the taxpayer dime. She concluded citing the incident when Waukesha petitioners, with 4K, filed to join Elmbrook School District with no 4K.

The 2nd Question from the Audience: Do you think the district should stick with its plan to close Tonawanda? Now the answers to this question rather took the wind out of the Save Tonawanda crowd and candidates Thomas and Byrne.

Meg Wartman: There isn't a plan to close Tonawanda!

Lynn Thomas: I know there isn't a plan but I think it is a definite (one for future?) There has been talk of it in past and would cause over-crowding. I would not support...its the only school in the heart of Elm Grove.

Jean Lambert: I agree with Meg, there isn't a plan to close Tonawanda. As we look ahead in our financial plan, our future looks bright.

Paul Byrne: I'm for neighborhood schools...I wouldn't want to see that happen. I'd like to see us more aggressive in getting kids into our schools.

After a few more questions, they concluded with closing remarks. I am citing only Wartman and Lambert here.

Meg Wartman: The MacIver Institute just named Elmbrook as the Top Large School District (in the state) Milwaukee Magazine puts us in the top 3. I am optimistic; We've had tough years with the budget... but (Meg concludes on an upbeat note.)

Jean Lambert: As a 40 year resident, I bring a demonstrated commitment to this district. I have 30 years private sector experience and 3 years on the board. I would be honored to serve.

After the forum, I briefly spoke with board member Glen Allgaier. It was obvious he admires Jean Lambert and Meg Wartman and then mentioned how well this board works with each other. They have the ability discuss things, even though they don't always agree, in a productive manner. I would like to see that relationship continue.

I think Jean Lambert summed it up well in Elmbrook incumbents face challengers: "'I'm running because we have, for the past couple of years, done a lot of heavy lifting with regards to Act 10 and decisions about Open Enrollment and the closing of Hillside,' Lambert said. 'Now we can concentrate on student achievement, acclimating the new superintendent and building our school communities as we have needed to redistrict.'"

Meg Wartman is one of that collective "we" Jean spoke of in the above quote. They have done heavy lifting. They have made tough decisions and our Elmbrook School District and the Elmbrook taxpayers are the better for it.

We should reelect Meg Wartman and Jean Lambert to serve on the board another term.


Remember that everyone in the Elmbrook School District votes for both school board races, regardless of where you live in the district.

More Reading:
Elmbrook gets high marks in two studies
MacIver Large School District Report Card
Brookfield Patch Elmbrook Candidates Debate 4K, School Closing
BrookfieldNow K4 dividing line in Elmbrook School Board race
BrookfieldNow Elmbrook incumbents face challengers
Past Posts: Elmbrook Candidate Forum & District 7 Info meeting
What? Families who HAVE 4K petition to join Elmbrook WITHOUT 4K?

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation

Conflict of interest? Schellinger for County Supervisor & Brookfield Alderman with left-over Schellinger for Assembly signs

We should be used to it by now: It's spring election time and Brookfield's perennial candidate, Tom Schellinger's, generic campaign signs are popping up on the main drags in southeast Brookfield--District 7. This go around, Tom is running for 2 offices at once!

Which ones? After all, you can't tell by just looking at his signs, for they just simply state, Vote Schellinger. He is running for Waukesha County Supervisor and trying again to regain his Brookfield District 7 Aldermanic seat.

Holding both offices is not against the rules; it is allowed. But I did question that arrangement causing a conflict of interest for an Alderman/Supervisor when representing their constituents. In a recent conversation with Waukesha D.A. Brad Schimel, he mentioned the dual role does present a possible conflict of interest, as Kathleen Cummings is finding out.

In fact, when I met Waukesha County Supervisor and Waukesha Alderman Kathleen Cummings at the Folk Fair last fall, I did wonder how that arrangement would work, should City issues conflict with County. (We were seated across from each other at the common seating in the food area and started chatting. She mentioned she was both a Supervisor and Alderman.) As I sat there listening, I wondered which group one would side with if the interest of the City differed from that of the County?

Though she thought it was a great opportunity at the time, she is now in a difficult spot because the City of Waukesha Police Chief is opposed to joining in with the County's Dispatch Communications Center. Cummings stated last month she "had been against joint dispatch but is willing to consider because of the county's new software..." This month she says she "is reviewing the information" though the Waukesha Police Chief still doesn't want the consolidation.

I do not bring this up to pick on Ms. Cummings (she seemed nice enough) but rather to illustrate how someone serving 2 masters--the City and the County--could be conflicted as to which group they are representing. I am trying to avoid that happening in my district.

Schellinger will be elected on April 3rd as District 20 County Supervisor, because he is running unopposed in that race. And thankfully, the likelihood of him also prevailing in his attempt to win back his job as District 7 Brookfield Alderman, against incumbent Renee Lowerr, is very remote. Still, I don't take anything for granted. If he would prevail, I believe it could create a conflict of interest, because his newly outlined Waukesha County District 20 area includes all of Brookfield District 7.

As I mentioned in the title, Schellinger is using some old Schellinger for Assembly signs in this campaign. Now that was one effort I didn't remember. I do remember most of his other attempts though. However, his race for 2 offices this go round can't top his 3 at once try in 2006: Waukesha County Supervisor, Brookfield Alderman, and Mayor of Brookfield.

But 6 years ago, at least he was opposed in each race. Even back then, Journal Sentinel columnist Laurel Walker poked fun at his efforts in a piece titled, If at first you don't succeed, run again from Dec. 3, 2005.

Laurel opened that column, "In one of my columns last week, I tried to encouraged civic-minded individuals to think about running for public office in local government... ...But I wasn't exactly advocating that anyone take on two at once. And certainly not three." Then she added, "It's not like he needs practice. Schellinger is fast becoming Waukesha County's own Harold Stassen."

She gave a tabulation of his past attempts, many I was unaware of, since I really didn't follow area politics until 2003. "He lost races for Brookfield mayor in 1998 and 2002, State Senate in 2001, State Assembly in 2002 and Waukesha County Supervisor in 2004. He also was passed over for appointment to a vacant County Board seat this year." (He finally won Supervisor in 2006 over appointee Barb Roncke, the same year he lost to Alderman Lisa Mellone and Mayor Jeff Speaker.)

I think the signs Schellinger is still using date back to that 2002 Assembly try mentioned above or earlier, rather than his 2010 attempt against Paul Farrow for the 98th? (It is difficult to say with all the stickers and differing races noted in the disclaimer area.)

Still not satisfied, though already our County Supervisor, in late fall 2011, he also applied for Alderman Lisa Mellone's job when she was required to resign her seat in order to apply for the job of City Clerk. Thankfully, the city reappointed Lisa. (She is also on the April 3rd ballot, unopposed, for the remainder of her term.)

As for this election cycle, isn't holding one office enough, Tom? I sure hope so.

Come back, Lisa Mellone, District 7 needs you!

Links: Practically Speaking, Fairly Conservative, RandyMelchert, Betterbrookfield, Jay Weber, Vicki McKenna, WisPolitics Quorum Call, Wisconsin Reporter, CNS News, Mark Levin, Breitbart BigGovernment, The Heritage Foundation