What's with Wickenheiser's ethics?
Tonight's Evening Snooze has a little snippet about the Downtown Development Authority approving a $20,000 facade grant for Ken Wickenheiser's renovation of that old rat trap, the City Hotel.
Here's the killer though: Wickenheiser sits on the DDA board but HE ABSTAINED FROM VOTING ON THE FACADE GRANT!
What's with this guy? Is he shooting for sainthood or something?
Ed Paisley needs to give him a remedial course in ethics.
Here's the killer though: Wickenheiser sits on the DDA board but HE ABSTAINED FROM VOTING ON THE FACADE GRANT!
What's with this guy? Is he shooting for sainthood or something?
Ed Paisley needs to give him a remedial course in ethics.
posted by The Observer at 5/17/2007 10:52:00 AM
35 Comments:
The last post smells of PBR.
The Monroe Evening News slipped to a new low citing a legal militia as “Goons” when they quelled a breach of the peace seventy years ago.
Observer,
I'm not quite sure what you are referring to in your post. I understand that there were two or three members of the DDA Board who abstained from their own facade requests, but did vote on the others. Mr. Wickenheiser did the correct thing by abstaining on his own request.
What is it you are trying to get at? Or are you somehow trying to take another cheapshot at Mr. Paisley?
Please clarify if you could.
Abstaining from a vote which you would financially benefit from is the correct move.
Answering a question about a Landlord's property in an effort to help him get a grant, and also you personally have no vested interest in the property, is also a correct move.
Again, please clarify.
One can be sure that Ken will spend the money wisely. Ken and Ed Pasley think clearly unlike the Observer
Absolutely any investment in our downtown is worthy of grants, tax abatements, low cost loans, etc. The $20K that Mr. Wickenheiser is getting is nothing compared to what he is investing to bring back a viable hotel to the downtown.
The Downtown Development Authority should be helping him at any opportunity, but from what I've heard, Rick Floriday and Linda Compora have made such a stink of what they believe as double dipping, that the DDA had to make allowances to give him the money which he deserved. Theses two idiots have never invested a dime in downtown, but feel that they are the voices to be heard. I'll bet that if you hired John Iacoangeli's firm as a consultant to Mr. Wickenheiser, he would recommend all sorts of programs, grants, funding, tax breaks, etc. If he didn't recommend that, then he would be diralect in he duties as a planner.
Well, whatever. He got the grant, so downtown can continue to be revitalized by one of the few people willing to stick out their own necks and pocketbooks to do so. I congratulate Ken and the other downtown investors.
Anyone hear how the project is going on the former Monroe Trophies building? I saw the drawings, and the building will look great when it is finished. Looks like a scaled down version of the museum, and the whole wall by the parking lot is going to be re-bricked. What an improvement to that eyesore!
Interesting blog here. Saw it up on the Monroe News site and checked it out. I'll be back.
By Monroe Trophy Building, perhaps reference is being made to the Eichbauer monument works. If so this building is the only one in the façade study commissioned under John Iacoangeli’s leadership as our planner needed nothing to bring it up to standards. Therefore are the readers to assume that any changes go against the standards are not needed in any case.
If anyone’s ethics need close watching it is Floraday. What was he doing in the Courthouse with Linda Compora and why was crippled up old David Alkire Smith there to have Linda’s stalking charge set aside. Should Linda’s be removed from council for lying under oath? Just how low will the political cat’s paws in this town stoop to distract attention from what they are doing?
Rick,
Why are you jealous of others?
Why do you hate Ed Paisley so much?
Man - the Monroe Evening News doesn't want anyone seeing this BLOG because of all you foul-mouthed individuals and personal attacks.
I bet they would have posted it if it weren’t mostly about Linda Jo Compora, their favorite source of information.
They would look pretty stupid if everyone understood how stupid she is.
I am still waiting for them to report that Linda Compora got a Personal Protection Order against a frail old man by lying to a judge. All of the documents are on Historicmonroe.org from the court hearings. This isn’t fiction like Skunk-gate, Flower-gate, and ethics gate. There is documentation that Linda J Compora is a deranged liar. If she wouldn’t have dropped the case the judge would have been forced to sanction her for perjury. This is a fact.
How is her falsely accusing Ed Paisley of wrongdoing news, but her needing a PPO against a frail old man not news? How is her falsely accusing the Mayor of spraying her car with skunk oil news, but this is not?
Well – the Monroe Evening News (MEN) never claimed to be fair or balanced.
I look forward to the election. There are two seats that need filled, maybe three.
First, obviously Linda J Compora must go. Does anyone know an interested party that needs a campaign worker?
Second, I can’t imagine that Dorothy Edwards is going to run again with dementia setting in. I hope a good candidate emerges, but I hope its not Jackie McGee or Pat McElliot (Spelling?). We don’t need flip flopping individuals who want to perform for the camera. We already have one of those.
Finally, perhaps the honorable Mayor has had enough after the past two years of accusations. I can’t imagine he wants to continue to serve another two years as he fights for his life, but he has my vote if he wants to.
The rest of council, while I don’t always agree with them, is good conscientious citizens who are serving Monroe and deserve our support.
I just hope worthless individuals like John Iacoangeli, Rick Floraday, Guyor, etc don’t resurface. I don’t think we can afford another two years of making Monroe a bankrupt, walkable city.
What is this walkable city stuff? There is no money to fix the sidewalks since John Iacoangeli, Guyor, and Compora raped us giving the firefighters early retirement.
What is this walkable city stuff? There is no money to fix the sidewalks since John Iacoangeli, Guyor, and Compora raped us giving the firefighters early retirement.
What is this walkable city stuff? There is no money to fix the sidewalks since John Iacoangeli, Guyor, and Compora raped us giving the firefighters early retirement.
Its amazing how easy it is to settle a contract when you give away the farm.
Then is Linda Compora a poor man’s John L. Lewis or Walter Ruther?
I would think the last administration was a rich man's John L. Lewis or Walter Ruther.
Only a rich man can afford to give union employees benefits they haven't earned.
Coincidentally, wasn't the Mayor at the time somehow related to the Union head? Ethics violation, anyone?
Where was Linda Jo Compora when that was going down? Oh yes, she was told to shut up and vote yes.
Where was Lampton "You Ate the Hot Dog" when millions were being given away? Oh yes - it wasn't Al so who cares.
Beware the candidate / citizen who only cares about one issue.
Councilmen Paisley's ethics came into question not by lobbying before the DDA - which as a citizen that is his business (albeit, it is funny that he was doing this for a client / landlord / friend). They came into question when he voted for a tax abatement on that property as a councilman. He should have abstained as he stated, later, that this was a friend / client / landlord / whatever. Or even when he was fined by the State Ethic's board - either way they are both dead issues - move on.
Smells like PBR - Naw - smells like spoiled milk (although over what I am not sure). A whole host of folks on this blog have a fixation, seemingly unhealthy, with others? Hows come? Did we all not learn to play nice when we were at tot lot?
So who is running this year? Heard that Ms. McGhee will not run - something about fear of past ethical / legal lapses coming to light. Her husband, Kelvin, is said to be the "heir apparent" to Councilwoman Edwards.
NAACP President Willie Hall has lined himself up with Councilwoman Compora (who wanted to subpoena him in her court case against the Hollywood Blvd. Stalker - AKA David Smith) and is ready to run.
The wild card is; Jeff Potts who is rumored to want to run - he is leading the sign campaign against Monroe Transfer.
Rick Flouraday is said not to be running. Though the rumor of Icoangenilli and Worrell making a "pact" to run was interesting - considering the bloviations from both could anyone get a word in during council meetings?
How about Councilman Burkett for Mayor? Good honest guy - I'd vote for him. That would give Adam a chance to run and maybe win!!
Whatsay the idea that Councilwoman Compora does not run again? The idea has been said that it would be better to fall on your sword and claim, "mental anguish" than to face a landslide loss.
Everyone seems safe (not to controversial - considering all things).
Overall - pretty good performance by our Council. Mostly proud of Councilman Martin, Benateau and Burkett. God Bless the Mayor and if he decides not to run - who could blame him. Get healthy and thanks for everything.
I don't think it is an ethics violation for Ed to vote on a proposal from a client / friend / landlord.
In the parlimentary procedure training they said you didn't have to exclude yourself if you didn't have a financial stake in it. Did Ed have a financial stake in that building?
To me it just sounds like he facilitated an improvement in downtown Monroe.
Whats the problem? None per the ethics committee.
anonymous said . . . "In the parliamentary procedure training they said you didn't have to exclude yourself if you didn't have a financial stake in it."
Yah - of course. Let it go already. The good Councilman should have reveled his relationship prior to the vote on the abatement just as the Mayor reveled his relationship with Sparkle Wash - it's basic common sense. Just like a judge would have to reveal his / her relationship in court. I am sure that this is simple enough to grasp (I work for you, you pay me for my service. I am in a position to vote to save you tax dollars. I should tell my constituents so that there is no appearance of impropriety - self explanatory - no matter what the ethics committee said).
Its over though - let it go.
I will chime in, though I have already "let it go".
If you do not have a financial stake in it, then you have no ethical violation in your future. Simply knowing the person is no violation, although it may appear as such.
The Mayor not voting on Sparkle Wash, even though it was later told that he could have voted, was done because the owners were relatives, and he didn't wish to give the wrong appearance. His choice, but not necessary.
Interesting discussion. No matter who it involves, I think there might be some confusion between conflict of interest and ethics issues. Conflict of interest is a legal problem. Ethical violations primarily involve perceptions. Someone once said that ethics is 90 percent perception. Often, one execises ethics to avoid the appearances of being shady.
BTW, for those of you who obviously missed the satire, I have nothing but high admiration for Mr. Wickenheiser and commend him for putting his money in downtown and keeping his mouth out of politics.
As opposed to others who have invested a great deal downtown and have not stayed out of politics?
So - let me get this straight.
According to the pundits you should rescues yourself from voting on any item where any small-minded individual may feel that you have a conflict of interest or ethics violation in the least.
So - if I know this guy, and you could kind of call him / her a business associate or a friend, I should rescues myself from voting on anything they are involved in, even if I can make my judgment impartially based on facts. I should do this so the Compora's and the Lamptons of the world won't have any reason to accuse me of wrongdoing.
Observer - do I have your point?
If I do I now demand that the entire DDA board resign immediately. They are all business owners / operators or landlords in the downtown area. They are making decisions that are designed to enhance the downtown, directly putting money into their pockets. They fund activities that are designed to get people to come downtown just so money is put in their pockets. They fund this with tax money.
Now - I don't have a business downtown, I don't shop there, I like a few downtown business people but I don't know if we are familiar enough to be considered friends - its at least a comfortable arm length separation. I think my complete detachment from Downtown Monroe makes me eminently qualified to be on the DDA. I even want to be chair since I am so impartial.
Rick - what do you think? Do you want to stop being a hypocrite now?
Oh yes – did you get my sarcasm?
Try this again.
The Councilman should not have "recused" himself. He should have placed other Council members and the Citizen's on actual and constructive notice that the owner of the building was his client / friend / landlord. This is the "ethical" thing to do. I agree that the Mayor could have voted for the Sparkle Wash issue but I believe, and so must he, that he did the right thing as now, months later - people are not talking about it (accept in a good way).
Yes - the DDA is comprised of business people who all know each other and from reading some of the defensive post must have a fully engulfed relationship. However, the DDA is overseen by the City Council - whom they are beholden to for funds.
Observer, good explanation on ethics v. conflict. Sadly, I don't think many on this board seem to want to understand that.
Let me get this straight.
Councilman Paisley should tell the other Council members if he has done business with anyone who comes before City Council?
So, if I go in and buy a bottle of pop and a bag of chips from Mr. Paisley's store, he should say that he is informing the public and council that he hame as a client/customer if I come before Council for business? Come on. That is ridiculous, but that is what you want?
Sorry, I was laughing so hard about your ideas about ethics that I accidentally typed "hame" instead of has me in my last post. My bad.
This would be all unnecessary if:
1. Everyone on council was a professional. Unfortunately Compora is not, so we have to put up with her antics.
2. We didn't have the camera's on so people could perform political demonstrations over things.
Why did more people show up before city council then the ZBA and CPC for the Monroe Transfer issue? Why didn’t an unemployed councilperson go to the 3:00 pension board meeting? They didn’t appear because no one could watch them on TV.
Eliminate the TV, and much of the lunacy goes away.
I agree that it is lunacy to expect every council member to fully disclose all of his or her customers, friends, acquaintances, relatives before every vote. I expect all but Compora to conduct themselves professionally, and act in what they believe is the best interest of the city as a whole.
Observer - I'll try to get over my Compora obsession if you can get over you Paisley obsession. Can you agree to that, Rick?
Glad I could give you a laugh. Too bad you find an issue like this laughable.
No - everyone that Councilman Paisley sells a pop or peanuts to from his business is a "client" that he should notify those on counsel he has a relationship. Yes - if you are paid for providing tax or other accounting services to someone and you rent space from them you should inform council and others of your relationship when you vote to provide that person a tax abatement on the very property that you are renting. Again - why is this funny?
Think this way: If the apparent "Antichrist" Linda Compora voted to give a business venture like oh, say, "fiduciary solutions" at tax abatement on property they owned then yes, if they were clients of hers she should tell others. Not doing this give the appearance of impropriety, if it exist or not.
BTW - not Rick and don't assume I'm a fan either. Not obsessed just amazed at the lack of understand of what ethics means.
Does give me insight into the real problems with this community.
Let's see. The Ethics Board were all appointed by Al. All are supporters of Al. Paisley was the Council liaison to this board.
The recommendation of the board was that in the future there should be disclosure. The key words here are "in the future" just not when it involves our upstanding Councilman Paisley! If they didn't think there was a little disclosure problem here the recommendation would've not been made, I'm sure. But since it involved Paisley, the Ethics Board chose not to slap the hands of one of it's own!! Nice impartial job!!
Try as you may to wangle Paisley out of his Ethics snafoo and turn him into a victim, the issue is disclosure, pals. He did not disclose his relationship to the property owner, period!! Not when he went to the DDA or from the dias when he voted to give the guy a $100,000 rehab. tax abatement- but in his stupidity has the propety owner come to the next council meeting and stand up and say he is a client of Paisley!! I believe this is a no-no according to the Charter. Ed was stupid and continues to be stupid! Ed will do the dance and give long wrangling speeches (by the way who writes this junk for him and because he read from a paper does it mean Iaco wrote it for him?) to try to confuse the public and have them believe he was just "doing his job"
Yeah, right! I suppose he was just "doing his job" when he got fined by the State and put on probation. Was he just "doing his job" when the Chamber supposedly fired his sorry behind as their accountant? Evidently not!
Or maybe he was just "doing his job" after the DDA meeting when he didn't mention that he was the tenant at 11 Washington and was seen entering the building with a set of keys! "Just doin' my job,folks!"
It's disclosure,pals. Ed didn't disclose. Ed was wrong!
Let's talk about the question about which law states that it's mandatory that Pension Board members attend meetings annually.
Did we ever get an answer? Of course not! Was the council meeting the right forum for asking this question? Yes! If you recall it was Al and Paisley who made the "law" statements. They were in attendance at the council meeting. Since they were the ones making the statements- they should be accountable for them!!
It seems that psychopath Dave Smith has no life. BTW did he go to the Pension Board meeting? I see that Dan Shaw of MEN shut Smith's sick gas off!! Good going Dan!! Smith posts as Genie on MEN blog. Smith chooses to post anonymously on this blog because in his delusional state, he posts then answers his own posts!! What a whacko!
He harasses a woman on behalf of the current administration- what a guy!! I was in church one Sunday and watch as Smith's wife had to take his cell phone away from the frail, crippled old man because he was acting like a child. Then he threw a hissy after it was taken away.
What a guy. Harasses a woman on behalf of the 3C Coalition. He seems to have their blessing, however it appears to be backfiring as people are talking that they would not vote for anyone on the 3C again because of Smith's harassment of Compora. Hell, it was all on tape!
But "Your HOnor.....I'm your friiieeend!" Smith is so delusional that he lists himself as Director, City of Monroe Economic Development Corporation in his biography. Only in his dreams.
Hope his homeowner's is paid up! Smith appears to like his 5 minutes of fame and loves an audience, but because he is not credible, just can't get it, so he's frustrated as hell and deliberately distorts facts in order to try get it. Libel anyone???
If I were some of the people that he slanders and libels on this blog, mostly Compora and Iaco, I'd own 530 Hollywood Dr.
Most recent example of his sickness. Fireman's contract- citizens were raped by Iaco,Compora and Guyor. But wait!! seems that a contract takes a 5-2 vote, right? So this passed because Iaco,Compora and Guyor cast 3 votes? Check the past minutes. It seems that Mr.(Honey, I screwed the Unions)Burkett, Suzanne (Al's mouthpiece and DMBN buddy) and Sabo (no longer in the picture) also voted for it. So the blowhard chooses to ignore Burkett, Wetzel and Sabo's vote in order to say the public got the screws from Iaco, Compora and Guyor. What an idiot!!
Well, I will tell this as absolute truth. The last post was from Floraday. He actually tipped his hand, but I won't give that up for now. I guess that shows his slanted view toward Ed Paisley, the man who beat him in the last council election.
Where did you hear that none of the former 3C would get re-elected? Guess you are running with the wrong crowd. Rumor has it that they will all get back in, and it is Compora who is on her way out. Just hope they are not discouraged from running because of the old BS ways that Compora and clan have acted.
It is interesting that you accuse the ethics committee of being biased. I think I'll make it a point to tell former Judge Braunlich that you, Rick, feel that he is acting unprofessionally. I'm sure that will go a long way with his son as a judge, if you should ever find yourself in front of him.
So, in closing, I'll restate that this vicious attack on Ed and his ethics, was presented to the readers by no other than Rick Floraday, loser to Mr. Paisley in the last election, THANK GOD!
Go ahead Rick, now you can post as your alter ego, Larry.
As I have answered your rant on another posting within this blog, let me also answer you on this one. Not on Mr. Smith's behalf, but for and on behalf of myself.
The accusation that I or anyone else is having Mr. Smith do any talking for them is ludicrous. I for one can speak for myself and have no fear of whether or not you like what I say. I will be honest and would hope that you could be also.
I can also correct you that there is no 3C coalition, nor has there been one since the last election, whether you believe it or not, that is your opinion and you need to get over it. Why you want to dwell on this is beyond me, but whatever, your choice.
Give me a call, and I will give you my opinions, unbiased and honest. It may not be what you believe or what you believe to be correct, but they are my views, and I am entitled to them, just as anyone else is, Mr. Smith included. You fight for first amendment rights, but they are for everyone, not only who you choose to follow or believe.
Let's see. No Coalition, huh? Save it for somebody else.
There's a Coalition all right. 6 Confused, Corrupt, Candyasses all done in and sucked in by Mayor Al's all consuming hatred of Iaco.
Too drunk with power and misguided perceived respect for yourselves to realize that you've been had!
It's a wonderful thing this perceived respect that you think you have isn't it? Wow, there's respect now where there wasn't any before. I'm somebody now!
Sow's ears miraculously turned into silk purses almost over night. What a power trip! Only in Monroe.
Only thing wrong with this picture is you actually believe you have respect when actually you are the laughing stock. A joke. An administration that will go down in the books as one of the worst that ever "served" this community.
Oh, excuse me. Not served the community, I meant to say served themselves.
And there's a group of sore losers locked into an effort to cause disruption at any given chance, why, because they lost. Sorry for your luck, but you should look at the bigger picture, which is the City, and none of it should be personal.
I would like to take the opportunity to refute the ranting poster, hopefully as eloquently as Brian Benetau did.
David Smith did not put up the posts that Anonymous was ranting about. Unlike Brian I don’t want lunatics calling me or showing up at my house, so I choose to post as Anonymous. I have considered coming up with a pen name to post under so at least my opinions are attributed to the same entity, but haven’t due to laziness. This is the same reason I haven’t posted on the MEN site; I don’t want to go through hoops to register. Please believe me that I swear on the Holy Bible that I am not David Smith.
I notice the lunatic poster accused David Smith of slander and libel, made all sorts of accusations and name-calling. Ranting Anonymous also indicates that if he were Iaco or Compora he would sue to own 530 Hollywood Drive.
Any interested people that want to can see that Compora already chose to take legal action against David Smith, and she lost. The documents are on Historicmonroe.org. They are factual – not made up. I took the time to read them. In my opinion if Compora would have continued her case she would have been exposed in many ways as a liar, but perhaps she actually believes what she said. Would that make her crazy? I don’t know.
I seriously doubt that the Council is directing Smith to do their bidding. I also seriously doubt that Smith is the mastermind that got this council to exclude Compora from their activities. Those are Compora’s words – not mine. You can read them from court documents. Go take a look. If somehow David Smith is as all powerful and connected to this council as the lunatic poster and Compora believe he is, I would be afraid to comment on him lest I disappear.
I also seriously doubt that this council could control him even if they wanted to. It would appear to me that he is acting independently, rationally, and thoughtfully. When he gets up to comment before council his thoughts are usually insightful. Sometimes you have to wade through some extraneous material to get to the point, but he does have a point. Even the judge who heard Compora’s case indicated that he was rational and thoughtful. I think the worst thing you could accuse him of is not always acting as a good Christian, but then only Jesus Christ was perfect.
So – lunatic poster, I suggest you now apologize to David Smith. You wouldn’t want anyone coming after you for slander or libel, would you?
I have an answer to Monroe's economic problems. From today forward there will be a coffee can outside of City Hall for fines. They are as followed:
1.00 - Calling Councilwoman Compora a "call girl" or any derivative of.
1.00 - Using the words psychopath, lunatic, mental out of context of without proper grounds.
2.00 - Bringing up anyone not currently in office or currently running for office as the root of all problems.
2.50 - Accusing Rick Floraday of being the author of any post that appears; ignorant, disrespectful, or generally ill informed. I am sure he does not have the time to post ALL of them.
2.75 - Berating the MEN by calling them directly or indirectly Councilwoman Compara's backers.
3.00 - For calling David Smith, frail, crippled, stupid or any other phrase that could be seen as demeaning and or hateful.
3.50 - For everyone continuing to post as "anonymous". Pick a nick name or something this way everyone can direct there venom at the right "anonymous".
5.00 - For stating and assuming that only members of the DMBN, DDA, CCC (yeah, I know it does not exist - but people still think it does - whatever), Current or past council / mayor / city manager or others are the ones who have the "right" answer for Monroe. (Oh, I do have the right answer - it's call cooperation and working together - not trying to create our own little fifedoms)
Finally -
100.00 - For assuming you know who an anonymous poster is. (Maybe it is all the same 35 year old guy living in his parents basement, rooting for the Oakland Raiders and searching ebay for Star Wars dolls, oops - action figures)
If we all will agree to this I believe that the City will be out of financial woes within two weeks and will have enough in reserves within two months to last us until, well at least until I am dead - and I ain't that old!
I'll put the can out in the morning - everyone game? (side note; do I need a sign permit for the can?).
Post a Comment
<< Home