Nomination papers and Kent Monte
[we received this question posted on the other Eye on Oshkosh site and because not everyone visits both sites I wanted to post it, and my response, for readers here...]
Saturday, February 03 2007 @ 02:25 AM MST
Contributed by: Anonymous
Does anyone know if there is truth to the rumor that Paul Esslinger and Melanie Bloechel were the ones who gave the information to Kent Monte about Sheurmann's election papers? I know there are cameras at city hall to show stuff like that but maybe someone knows if it's true.
Authored by: admin on Saturday, February 03 2007 @ 05:28 AM MST
What I can tell you about this is the city clerk's office did confirm for me yesterday that indeed, Mr. Esslinger and Mrs. Bloechl (a former mayor for those who don't know who she is) were the ones reviewing nomination papers at City Hall. The natural assumption then is that their "discovery" was passed along to Mr. Monte, who in turn called the radio station to report his "treasure trove" of information.
Thing is, I'm still trying to figure out what the real story is here. So there were mistakes on Meredith Scheuermann's nomination papers that resulted in 18 signatures being thrown out. Big deal. Mistakes on nomination papers or invalid signatures are not uncommon - that's why candidates usually submit more than the required amount.
It should also be pointed out that had they been discovered earlier on they would have been correctable errors. Granted, they should have been caught by Mrs. Scheuermann or the clerk's office, but they weren't. And certainly, those signatures should not count if they're invalid, but (a) why were papers being reviewed so late in the election process, and again, (b) what is the real story here?
Scheuermann still has enough valid signatures to legally remain on the ballot and there was no evidence of fraud or anything like it discovered as a part of this.
Maybe the bigger question should be why is Kent Monte crying to the media about an honest mistake that doesn't change his opponent's status in the election?
Soon after the reports aired yesterday Monte was already trying to downplay things and complaining about how the media made him look like he hated Meredith Scheuermann. Poor Kent Monte - always misunderstood by everyone. He went on to say he doesn't hate her and wasn't out to get her in any way. Really? Then why call the media with so-called "news" that doesn't change a thing?
Most of the people I've talked to or heard speaking about this think this is more silliness from a candidate who's an habitual complainer. As I see it, Kent Monte is a crybaby (just look at everything he's been whining about this campaign season alone) and probably a desperate candidate who feels the need to continue getting his name out in the media. With stunts like he's been pulling lately, he should feel desperate.
The media report yesterday said Monte was "crying foul" over the nomination paper incident. The only thing foul here that I can see is the smell coming from such an amateurish stunt in the 11th hour.
- Cheryl Hentz
Saturday, February 03 2007 @ 02:25 AM MST
Contributed by: Anonymous
Does anyone know if there is truth to the rumor that Paul Esslinger and Melanie Bloechel were the ones who gave the information to Kent Monte about Sheurmann's election papers? I know there are cameras at city hall to show stuff like that but maybe someone knows if it's true.
Authored by: admin on Saturday, February 03 2007 @ 05:28 AM MST
What I can tell you about this is the city clerk's office did confirm for me yesterday that indeed, Mr. Esslinger and Mrs. Bloechl (a former mayor for those who don't know who she is) were the ones reviewing nomination papers at City Hall. The natural assumption then is that their "discovery" was passed along to Mr. Monte, who in turn called the radio station to report his "treasure trove" of information.
Thing is, I'm still trying to figure out what the real story is here. So there were mistakes on Meredith Scheuermann's nomination papers that resulted in 18 signatures being thrown out. Big deal. Mistakes on nomination papers or invalid signatures are not uncommon - that's why candidates usually submit more than the required amount.
It should also be pointed out that had they been discovered earlier on they would have been correctable errors. Granted, they should have been caught by Mrs. Scheuermann or the clerk's office, but they weren't. And certainly, those signatures should not count if they're invalid, but (a) why were papers being reviewed so late in the election process, and again, (b) what is the real story here?
Scheuermann still has enough valid signatures to legally remain on the ballot and there was no evidence of fraud or anything like it discovered as a part of this.
Maybe the bigger question should be why is Kent Monte crying to the media about an honest mistake that doesn't change his opponent's status in the election?
Soon after the reports aired yesterday Monte was already trying to downplay things and complaining about how the media made him look like he hated Meredith Scheuermann. Poor Kent Monte - always misunderstood by everyone. He went on to say he doesn't hate her and wasn't out to get her in any way. Really? Then why call the media with so-called "news" that doesn't change a thing?
Most of the people I've talked to or heard speaking about this think this is more silliness from a candidate who's an habitual complainer. As I see it, Kent Monte is a crybaby (just look at everything he's been whining about this campaign season alone) and probably a desperate candidate who feels the need to continue getting his name out in the media. With stunts like he's been pulling lately, he should feel desperate.
The media report yesterday said Monte was "crying foul" over the nomination paper incident. The only thing foul here that I can see is the smell coming from such an amateurish stunt in the 11th hour.
- Cheryl Hentz
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 6:29 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home