Breathe Free tactics more about "smoke and mirrors," rather than just smoke
As this story gets posted, election day is almost here and a decision will be made concerning the smoking ban in Oshkosh restaurants. Even if the Breathe Free Oshkosh people get their way, it should be viewed as a hollow victory, given the various unfair and slimy tactics they stooped to during this entire campaign.
For starters, they accepted an illegal campaign contribution from a city-chartered board (Oshkosh Confront Addictions Now, aka the Oshkosh CAN Board); they failed to put a disclaimer on one of their pieces of direct mail literature - something required by state election law; and their spokesperson Margey Davey was quoted in the local paper as saying a line in their literature suggesting ban opponents were pushing for "more smoking" in Oshkosh restaurants had been removed, when in fact, it was not and apparently was never intended to be. Let's address that last issue right off the bat.
Not only was that very misleading line not removed from Breathe Free literature, but when called on it, Davey arrogantly stated, "I guess you could say this is the perfect example of not believing everything you read in the newspaper. They don't always report accurately either, do they?" We're not sure what the word "either" suggests, Margey, and while you may think this is a perfect example of people not believing everything they read, we contend this is the perfect example of the type of "smoke and mirrors" tactics groups like yours employ.
Additionally, if Davey's quote was inaccurate, being the nit-picker she has come to be known as down at the City Clerk's office, she immediately should have been on the phone asking the Northwestern for a correction. That apparently didn't happened, and probably for one of two very good reasons. Either the quote was accurate and her message was purposefully misleading OR the quote actually was an error, which in that case why would they ask for a correction when the quote seemed to suggest the Breathe Free people were trying to be nothing but honest, forthright and fair? Such an inaccurate quote painted them in a good light, so why mess with it, right?
The point needs to be made that Breathe Free Oshkosh, with Davey leading the charge, has been picking apart every little thing they can with the petitions filed by the restaurant owners for an opposing referendum. Moreover, if the roles were reversed and it was the restaurant owners doing all these things, Breathe Free would be screaming at the top of their lungs. That was proven very early in the game. Hell, Davey and Breathe Free even tried to stop the restaurants from getting their referendum question on the same ballot, by her claiming, among other things, that the petitions may not all be legal and saying they felt the petitions usurped the city council of its ability to act on public health issues. That particular issue is addressed in a separate opinion piece on this web site, but if they wanted to complain and wonder about legalities, they needed to make sure their own house was in order first. Perhaps if Davey and her group had spent more time making sure they had all their I's dotted and T's crossed, they would not have screwed up time and time again in their quest to control people's lives and businesses.
Then we have the CAN Board members making an illegal campaign contribution to Breathe Free Oshkosh, something strictly forbidden, and the chairman of the CAN board, Chuck Dinkel, indignantly saying in the paper how he was "disgusted" with the city and city fathers. Give us a break, Mr. Dinkel!! And you are not the only one disgusted here. We find it disgusting that CAN Board members seem to view themselves as being above the law. The city did not cave in to pressure from the restaurant owners, Mr. Dinkel, and how dare you even suggest that that was the case. Your group and Breathe Free Oshkosh were made to follow the same laws that everyone else has to. But based upon your attitude, following the law and rules governing your board is apparently just a pesky little nuisance that you can't be bothered with. Maybe it's time for people to start looking into things that took place in the town of Algoma when you were on the board there. Lord only knows if everything done there was legal or not, since things under your leadership here have turned into such an abortion.
Dinkel also has the misguided perception that this smoking ban issue is not a political one, but merely a public health issue. Not political!!!! Are you kidding? For a politician, Mr. Dinkel doesn't seem to understand the word "political." Let us enlighten you, sir. The Breathe Free Oshkosh group, of which you are a member, made smoking in restaurants a political issue when it tried to have the city council create an ordinance banning it. Breathe Free then made it even more political when they immediately began planning a direct legislation effort by creating a binding referendum for placement on the April 6 ballot. This has been political from the beginning and it was Breathe Free and/or the CAN Board who made it such. There can be no denying that.
And let's not forget some of the strong-armed tactics employed by Breathe Free in its telephone marketing campaign - calling some Oshkosh households as many as five times in one evening and creating such irate citizens that they began calling city council members, some of whom in turn suggested these citizens file a harrassment report with the police department.
One of the things many in this community may not be aware of is that the CAN Board regularly solicits money from local businesses, in particular for its Festival of Trees event during the holiday season. The money raised from that event goes to help with addiction-related programming for kids, etc. But here's the kicker: Some of the businesses solicited by the CAN Board for donations are restaurants. These restaurant owners historically have given freely of both their time and money, but then the CAN Board turns right around and kicks the restaurant owners in THEIR "can," by making a $500 donation to Breathe Free Oshkosh - basically using the restaurant owners' own money against them. And even though the money had to be returned to the CAN Board, the fact that some members would be so conniving as to do something like that is reason enough for restaurant owners, and any other business owners concerned about preserving their ability to run their establishment as they see fit, to stop giving to the CAN Board for things like this. These businesses either should band together and start their own activity to help fund addiction-related programs or give to the other ones in existence who know how to follow the law and don't co-mingle their interests or talk out of both sides of their mouths.
If a smoking ban passes and ultimately goes into effect, so be it. But it should be won by legal and ethical means, not by employing the sleazy, low-ball tactics Breathe Free and the CAN Board (many of whose members also belong to Breathe Free) did in this campaign. Otherwise it has no real meaning. These groups should have followed the same rules as the restaurant owners and certainly need to be held to the same standards.
For starters, they accepted an illegal campaign contribution from a city-chartered board (Oshkosh Confront Addictions Now, aka the Oshkosh CAN Board); they failed to put a disclaimer on one of their pieces of direct mail literature - something required by state election law; and their spokesperson Margey Davey was quoted in the local paper as saying a line in their literature suggesting ban opponents were pushing for "more smoking" in Oshkosh restaurants had been removed, when in fact, it was not and apparently was never intended to be. Let's address that last issue right off the bat.
Not only was that very misleading line not removed from Breathe Free literature, but when called on it, Davey arrogantly stated, "I guess you could say this is the perfect example of not believing everything you read in the newspaper. They don't always report accurately either, do they?" We're not sure what the word "either" suggests, Margey, and while you may think this is a perfect example of people not believing everything they read, we contend this is the perfect example of the type of "smoke and mirrors" tactics groups like yours employ.
Additionally, if Davey's quote was inaccurate, being the nit-picker she has come to be known as down at the City Clerk's office, she immediately should have been on the phone asking the Northwestern for a correction. That apparently didn't happened, and probably for one of two very good reasons. Either the quote was accurate and her message was purposefully misleading OR the quote actually was an error, which in that case why would they ask for a correction when the quote seemed to suggest the Breathe Free people were trying to be nothing but honest, forthright and fair? Such an inaccurate quote painted them in a good light, so why mess with it, right?
The point needs to be made that Breathe Free Oshkosh, with Davey leading the charge, has been picking apart every little thing they can with the petitions filed by the restaurant owners for an opposing referendum. Moreover, if the roles were reversed and it was the restaurant owners doing all these things, Breathe Free would be screaming at the top of their lungs. That was proven very early in the game. Hell, Davey and Breathe Free even tried to stop the restaurants from getting their referendum question on the same ballot, by her claiming, among other things, that the petitions may not all be legal and saying they felt the petitions usurped the city council of its ability to act on public health issues. That particular issue is addressed in a separate opinion piece on this web site, but if they wanted to complain and wonder about legalities, they needed to make sure their own house was in order first. Perhaps if Davey and her group had spent more time making sure they had all their I's dotted and T's crossed, they would not have screwed up time and time again in their quest to control people's lives and businesses.
Then we have the CAN Board members making an illegal campaign contribution to Breathe Free Oshkosh, something strictly forbidden, and the chairman of the CAN board, Chuck Dinkel, indignantly saying in the paper how he was "disgusted" with the city and city fathers. Give us a break, Mr. Dinkel!! And you are not the only one disgusted here. We find it disgusting that CAN Board members seem to view themselves as being above the law. The city did not cave in to pressure from the restaurant owners, Mr. Dinkel, and how dare you even suggest that that was the case. Your group and Breathe Free Oshkosh were made to follow the same laws that everyone else has to. But based upon your attitude, following the law and rules governing your board is apparently just a pesky little nuisance that you can't be bothered with. Maybe it's time for people to start looking into things that took place in the town of Algoma when you were on the board there. Lord only knows if everything done there was legal or not, since things under your leadership here have turned into such an abortion.
Dinkel also has the misguided perception that this smoking ban issue is not a political one, but merely a public health issue. Not political!!!! Are you kidding? For a politician, Mr. Dinkel doesn't seem to understand the word "political." Let us enlighten you, sir. The Breathe Free Oshkosh group, of which you are a member, made smoking in restaurants a political issue when it tried to have the city council create an ordinance banning it. Breathe Free then made it even more political when they immediately began planning a direct legislation effort by creating a binding referendum for placement on the April 6 ballot. This has been political from the beginning and it was Breathe Free and/or the CAN Board who made it such. There can be no denying that.
And let's not forget some of the strong-armed tactics employed by Breathe Free in its telephone marketing campaign - calling some Oshkosh households as many as five times in one evening and creating such irate citizens that they began calling city council members, some of whom in turn suggested these citizens file a harrassment report with the police department.
One of the things many in this community may not be aware of is that the CAN Board regularly solicits money from local businesses, in particular for its Festival of Trees event during the holiday season. The money raised from that event goes to help with addiction-related programming for kids, etc. But here's the kicker: Some of the businesses solicited by the CAN Board for donations are restaurants. These restaurant owners historically have given freely of both their time and money, but then the CAN Board turns right around and kicks the restaurant owners in THEIR "can," by making a $500 donation to Breathe Free Oshkosh - basically using the restaurant owners' own money against them. And even though the money had to be returned to the CAN Board, the fact that some members would be so conniving as to do something like that is reason enough for restaurant owners, and any other business owners concerned about preserving their ability to run their establishment as they see fit, to stop giving to the CAN Board for things like this. These businesses either should band together and start their own activity to help fund addiction-related programs or give to the other ones in existence who know how to follow the law and don't co-mingle their interests or talk out of both sides of their mouths.
If a smoking ban passes and ultimately goes into effect, so be it. But it should be won by legal and ethical means, not by employing the sleazy, low-ball tactics Breathe Free and the CAN Board (many of whose members also belong to Breathe Free) did in this campaign. Otherwise it has no real meaning. These groups should have followed the same rules as the restaurant owners and certainly need to be held to the same standards.
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 7:02 AM
0 comments
