The front page of today's Oshkosh Northwestern has a photo of School Board candidates Dan Becker and Amy Weinsheim observing ballots during the recount procedure currently going on. Becker asked for a recount after he came up eight votes short on April 4th. According to the Northwestern story, Becker literally wants the 262 votes cast at St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church on Main St. (the place I vote at, in case anyone is interested) nullified because the ballot bag was not signed by the chief election inspector at that district.I disagree with Dan Becker on board issues, but he takes his board responsibility seriously, is responsive to citizens, and I think overall did a good job in his first term. However, if he is seriously trying to suppress 262 votes on the basis of what appears to be a technicality, then he is turning this recount into Florida 2000. A request to suppress votes will also force many people who voted for him to question their support, resulting in a situation where even if Becker wins the recount he will go back on the Board with his reputation seriously tarnished.
Becker and Weinsheim should vigorously defend their rights during the recount. But let's remember this is not Bush-Gore 2000 and we are not dealing with dimpled chads.
Finally: if the Board of Canvassers decides to suppress my vote at St. John's Church, I will seek a legal remedy to make sure my vote counts.
66 comments:
The bag was counted yesterday afternoon prior to 3pm. The Northwestern is out to make Dan look bad in the public eyes so they ran the story as is rather than give the update. They should not be allowed to endorse candidates because it creates bias journalism like in this case. Amy was their endorsement so they are spinning all of the stories in her favor and against Becker. Becker is simply following the rules and guidlines set forth by the state elections board. Agree or disagree with his position, just remember that he is supported by those rules and regulations. He and Amy have not done anything wrong or unethical. They are playing by the rules and getting this recount done.
Knowing they would eventually have to do a full story anyhow, why would the Northwestern intentionally not run a story including the update? I mean, the election is over and the ballots cast. They can't make Mr. Becker look any worse than he has himself by asking that 260 and some votes not be counted because somebody accidentally forgot to sign a stupid bag. Get real.
Wait just a minute. there are persons writing things here that DO NOT convey the accurate picture of what is and has transpered during this recount process. How would I know, I've actually been there. I was there while the discussion insued about the ballots from District 8. While Mrs. Weinsheim has stated repeatedly that She feels that their are those trying to make a case for fraud, and that she is frustrated as a voter that there is discussion as to whether or not these ballots should be included.
I personally feel that with the oversights and mistakes ( surely unintentional) that have been made and the number of documented inconsisties. There is in my mind a legitimate concern for the intigrity of the election process.
I can not say if there is a greater need for training, more people to participate as there is a great deal to do and remember or if it is simply lack of accountability. Whatever the case, votes being counted is important, however making sure that the sacred ballot box and the process of voting and the SAFEGUARDS to protect these important documents of our democracy, has not been compromised.
I hope that you will come a watch the process, you will never again take an election for granted.
Melanie Bloechl
The Becker challenge goes to the heart of the problems in our system. He apparently has assumed that there is a conspiracy afoot to get him. We have become completely jaded about even the voting process itself.
After 2000, everyone jumps to the conclusion that if there is a problem, then it must be an underhanded plot.
It is a shame to see local politics descend to this level.
Melanie Bloechl is saying that things are being written here that aren't accurate. What for example? I've not seen anyone say anything here that didn't occur. The ON said Mrs. Weinsheim stated she is frustrated by the process. Everything sounds accurate. Is it? Or is this more the case of a small group of people who think there is a conspiracy of sorts, thereby disenfranchising a small group and because of that 262 others should be disenfranchised? The electoral process understands there may be errors and there are measures in place to address close elections (i.e., a recount such as we're seeing). there is absolutely NO WAY to insure 100% accuracy in anything in life. If someone knows how, please share it with the rest of us.
Melanie Bloechl's grammar is so poor I can barely understand what she is trying to say. Her point is lost in her inability to grasp basics of the English language. Tony, you teach communication: teach her something.
At least she left her name.
I just came from the recount and will be posting notes that have been taken over the course of this on my blog and Oshkosh News. If Tony would like, he has my permission to link them or cut and past them to his site.
One point I woul like to make about that bag. Amy has objected to and gotten ballots excluded for not having the exact same signature that is also required on the bag. I watched as that seemingly inconsistancy occurred on more than a few ballots. The statute requires polling inspector signatures on ballots AND on the sealed bags. Deduce your own conclusion.
My opinion at this point is that I don't care who wins as long as the count is fair and accurate. In election law security is a huge issue, when that is violated, questions arise as to legalities.
The board of canvassers has an attorney at their disposal throughout this process. I am sure they have taken guidance from them. So are we to deduct that if they allow some to be excluded and others to be included, they're part of the conspiracy too?
I just spent from 8:30am to 6:50pm at the School District office observing (and a few times standing in for Amy Weinsheim). I have a number of thoughts and comments regarding some of the above statements.
Mrs. Monte is correct that Mrs. Weinsheim has objected to some ballots that did not have the required "signature -[really initials] of 2 poll workers, but that is only because Mr. Becker started to pull these, it wouldn't make sense to let Mr. Becker discard ballots with one signature and a vote for Mrs. Weinsheim but then not discard a ballot with one signature and a vote for Mr. Becker. Also while Mr. Becker continually objected that it was inconsistent to discard ballots that didn't have two signatures but not a bag without a signature doesn't really make sense. First of all the poll worker "testified" that she did in fact deliver that bag to city hall but most importantly all the ballots in the bag had the required 2 signatures of poll workers. You can talk all you want about "chain of custody" but in reality it is really far-fetched to believe that someone stole ballots, filled them out, forged two pollworkers initials and then sealed the bag.
Second, I observed Mr. Becker objecting to and wanting to invalidate absentee ballots because there was no address listed for the witness, even though the attorney present repeatedly said "an address for the witness on the absentee envelope is not required by law". He also wanted to invalidate all the absentee ballots in one ward because the poll workers did not write ABS next to the absentee voter's name in the voter books like the workers did in the other wards. I don't see how you can say that is not voter suppression ---again the lawyer stated that it is NOT required by law to have ABS next to the name of a voter who voted by absentee. I also observed him wanting to invalidate an absentee ballot because the voters signature on the envelope was on the witness line and the witness' signature was below the voters signature, the signature was on the envelope but not on the line.
These kinds of objections over and over and then asking the same objection be read back to him time and time again do cost money since the district has to pay all the workers and especially the attorney for the time they are there. I'm pretty sure this will cost much more than the estimated $6,000 to $8,000 because I bet they have already spent that in attorney's fees alone.
The question I would love to know the answer to (and the question Mr. Becker wouldn't answer when asked by the TV news reporter) is:
Mr. Becker will you sue if you win the recount or will all the irregularities suddenly not matter? His answer to the reporter "that has yet to be determined" [I'm guessing it will be determined by the results of the recount].
I'm no longer sure what this recount is about but it is most definitely not about "making sure all the votes are counted".
There is more but that's enough for now.
Teresa Thiel
Who said anything about conspiricy?
What about just plain bad judgment?
If this ends up in court, a judge will decide who is right after all. It is tempting to file myself after hearing all that transpired throughout the day of April 4th. I don't think it was a conspiricy against anyone but it begs to ask why wasn't there more training?
Everyone is so mad about the 262 potential votes that could be tossed? What about the fact that is only 1/2% of the registered voters? Oh yeah, they didn't all vote. That should be what is appauling with this election!
//Target//
It's true Jayce that she did leave her name. At least she got that much right.
Anon is always anoying. Time for me to get an account, stop lurking, and add with accountability (this is my first post btw).
I vote at the same location as Tony. If needed I'll submit to DNA comparative testing of my sweat and my ballot, while encouraging all others to do so.
In a time when "the west" is promoting democracy, any vote discounted for any reason is the enemy of any who truely hope for peace among humans.
~Bob (Roberts) Knudsen~
Well, Mrs Thiel, One could also say that Dan started having them tossed because Amy was. Since yesxterday was the first day you were actually there, how would you know which it is? Some of them from Tuesday were marked and objected to by Dan, but not pulled. Most, if not all of the ones objected to by Amy were pulled and not counted at all. Where is the voter suppression here? Marked...Pulled...Hmm.
While I wrote what actually happened, Mrs Thiel is clearly writing what she wants to see happen even when she isn't there to see it or can she see into the board room from Heilmann's and other's offices (I hope student files weren't just laying around since anyone seems to have access these days) and while walking Amy's baby around?
As far as the bag, The signature missing is from the polling inspecter meant to ensure the bag has not been tampered with. The objection was to set the bag aside for further evaluation. Canvassers chose to open the bag and to count the ballots. Later, additional people were brought in with pruportedly first hand knowledge of one bag that is identical to more than a hundred others. Bottom line is that the votes were counted.
If Mrs. Thiel could overcome her biases long enough to talk to Dan, she would know who has given him advice as to how to object or what to object on. Each ballot and envelope that gets objected to gets a note on it for further scrutiny. Those who have advised Dan have more individual knowledge of the process than everyone in that room combined, including the district lawyer.
If Mrs. Thiel knew anything about chain of custody, she would be pointing out that it has more to do with criminal law in the context Dan was referring. However, chain of possession of election materials is also guided by laws and regulations as to how it is to be done. If a signature by the Polling inspector was missing and there is a place for one and training to put one there, that is a viloation of procedure and could also nullify the votes within the bag because someone said "oops." Bottom line is that the votes were counted anyway and Dan can object to whatever he likes to ensure a fair count. The only one talking conspiracy theory is Mrs. Thiel. If she doesn;t like the rules, I hope she writes her state representative since that is who makes them.
One of Dan's points has been that, at the very least, procedures and security measures were violated. People like Mrs. Thiel would like to keep the conspiracy theory going and tack it to Dan's back. What is Amy and her supporters afraid of, the count is currently in her favor even with pulling Dan's votes. She has to object and not for fairness.
The attorney for the district has said on other days the witness address is not necessary based on what the City Clerk said though she wasn't 100% positive. She said she accepts them anyway, she did not say it was legal. Mrs. Thiel was not there for the initial discussion of this.
Mrs. Thiel, as I read all of your comments, I would point out that they are somewhat accurate and thoroughly incomplete. EVERY ward prior to the initial thing had the initials ABS. Dan asked that the ballots without be marked, they were still counted.
As for cost, apparently Teresa Collins and the others employed by the district work for free any other day? You fail to mention that the cost includes salaries of people getting paid by the district anyway regardless of which room they are in and the tasks they are doing.
Every level of government is supposed to have provisions to prevent operating budgets from being effected or I doubt cities like Winneconne and Ripon would have done their own recounts, one with the same ballots we are counting, and scheduling special elections. If our school district did not have something in place, maybe Heilmann would consider paying us back for all his many coffee breaks in the room during the day. So much for an over worked administration.
I can't wait to see more from Teresa Thiel. I am sure those from other sites who question accuracy and tone of posts will not be doing the same here, except to refute my take on this.
Mrs. Thiel succeeded in pointing out that if a private citizen can be in the room, do so. That is the only way you will know for sure what is accurate. I also encourage people to talk to Dan and Amy. I know Dan will take calls.
Tony, I have some recount updates on my blog. Not all the notes are from me, but all the information came form people who actually witness each event. Feel free to link it or copy and paste here.
I just deleted an anonymous personal attack on Michelle Monte from this thread. I really don't want to have to turn this into a moderated forum, so if you're thinking of writing something hostile about someone, try counting to ten first or something. Chill out.
It also sounds like Mrs. Monte wants to keep the conspiracy theory going.
She has commented on how she hopes student files are not laying around since anyone seems to have access to Heilmann's office these days and she has cast aspersions on poll workers by suggesting that because all the bags look alike one can't be identified from the others. She also has commented on how votes Becker has objected to have been marked and set aside while those Weinsheim has objected to have not been counted. That casts aspersions on the canvassers. Most anyone can see those comments are all suggestive of a conspiracy of one magnitude or another.
A final point would be about the advice Becker is getting. Mrs. Monte says it is coming from people who have more individual knowledge of the process than everyone in the room combined, including the district lawyer. How or where did these advisers gain so much knowledge? We don't have that many recounts in this county for someone to have that much knowledge. If she's talking about Becker's lawyer, how and where did he gain so much experience and what measure does Mrs. Monte use to make that assessment? But it's funny. With all that experience and knowledge, Becker's objections have been noted but not usually acted upon the way he would like. Why? A conspiracy is what the Becker supporters are suggesting and comments like Monte's prove it.
I hope Weinsheim wins and Becker sues. Let a judge decide. Unless of course you think they would be biased and part of a conspiracy too.
Just because the questions are being asked, doesn't mean that there is a conspiricy. Chances are that the bag is genuine. But the possibility exists that the bag is different. If you looked at 50 of those bags in a line without the signatures on them, you would not be able to tell one from another. That is all, no conspiricy there.
Please go and watch if you can. It is an experience that you cannot imagine by reading notes. It is a very tense environment that can only be seen and not read about. Today may be the last day so try and stop by, even if it is for 15 minutes. See for yourself and then form your own opinion rather than worry if comments are biased.
K Monte
Some of the comments made by Mrs. Monte are suggestive of a conspiracy (lack of fair play or a bias toward one over the other, if either of those phrases makes people feel better). Instead of answers to simple questions we get rhetoric.
I've worked as a poll-worker / election inspector here in Oshkosh. It is incredibly detail oriented work from initialling ballots, marking both voter lists, writing "ABS" next to the absentee ballots, signing the printouts before and after, signing this, signing that, checking this, checking that. It is one of the most anal obsessive-compulsive work on the planet, which is one of the reasons I like doing it.
However, despite all of the detailed instructions, which change slightly year to year, some mistakes happen, and at least in the case of Pam Ubrig she pays very close attention to those mistakes and makes every effort to see that they are not repeated. You basically have 7 people at a station who have been sitting in that room from 6 AM until 9 PM - there is A LOT of pressure to get everything wrapped up and finished at the end of the night. A missing signature does not suprise me at all.
Ballot bags are signed by five election inspectors who worked that district once sealed. If those people's names are on the bag, those are the ballots from that district. If there is any doubt one can count the votes manually and compare them to the machine print out - if the 'real' ballots were switched with 'fakes' the results in every race would be way off. Furthermore all ballots printed for an election are also tracked - every bag of blank ballots - opened or not opened - is accounted for at every level. No missing ballots = no fake ballots.
Little mistakes should not result in peoples votes not counting unless the little mistakes are the result of actual 'fraud', which I find highly unlikely in this case. If ballots are being thrown out because there wasn't two election initials on the ballot that is wrong - it denies voters their votes based on election inspector error. However - if they are going to do that they need to throw them ALL out if they don't have two initials - not just one's that voted for this person or that person. You don't cherry pick which ballots to count - you count them all based on the criteria. This is the lesson learned from Florida.
The solution to avoid these problems in the future is to make Election Day a Holiday - No classes, no work, and recruit more detail oriented poll workers, train them better, and have more of them at each poll station.
After working the polls I have great respect for the entire process and an increased awareness of the painstaking efforts that go into assuring accuracy and neutrality on election day.
My 2 cents
Kent,
I've been too busy at UW Oshkosh this week to get out to the recount. But I am curious as to why it is a "very tense environment." Who or what is making it tense?
Five years ago Frank Tower defeated Shirley Mattox by 1 or 2 votes on election night. She asked for a recount, and Dan Rylance and I were able to sit through some of it. Dan sat through much more of the process than I did, so his recollection may be different from mine, but as I recall there was very little tension. The candidates were cordial with each other, disagreements with the canvassers were handled respectfully, and the dominant overall mood was boredom rather than tension.
I gained some respect for Mr. Tower because when the recount went againt him he did not threaten lawsuits or suggest improper behavior on the part of anyone. Rather, he simply congratulated Shirley, thanked his supporters, and said he would run again the next year. I think his "high road" approach to the recount had a lot to do with his winning election the next year.
My advice to whoever loses the Becker/Weinsheim recount is to take the High Road: congratulate your opponent, thank your supporters, and run again next year. Better yet, they should even pledge to work with the board of canvassers to eliminate the glitches in our voting system.
A high road approach to this process will reduce tension and build respect for the candidate. I would even go as far to predict that the high road "loser" would be the top vote getter next year should s/he decide to run again. That's just my opinion.
Tony,
The tension is from both sides of the room. Amy feels inconvenienced by the whole ordeal and I can understand that. Dan has taken time off work and I don't think he has slept in more than a week. The environment is more of a partisan arena. There was a district administrator that comes in the room, talks with Amy, and others in the room. Yesterday this administrator walked up talked to a person who was having a conversation with Dan but didn't even bother to be cordial and say 'hi' to him. That type of behavior creates tension.
Michelle and I have gone out of our way to be cordial to both sides. I have had conversations with Teresa Theil and John Weinsheim. Michelle brought in flowers and eclairs yesterday to brighten up the atmosphere. We (Mel and I) even poked fun at the attorney's tie (all in fun) to lighten things up.
It MUST be noted that some of the ballots that Dan has objected to and were tossed were votes for HIM and not Amy. He has thrown HIS votes out. The challenges are legitimate and equal from both sides. I would hope that both candidates could find a middle ground but there has been tension at the board table in the past.
I will not deny that Dan is a friend, but that doesn't mean that I am against Amy or any that support her. I may not agree with her politically, but everyone is entitled to an opinion. It is politics, not personal.
This account of events is not meant to be biased but I will not say it isn't. It is simply my point of view and because I support Dan, may appear biased. I wanted to answer Tony's question and would invite Teresa to do the same since she was there too.
Have a great afternoon and try to stay dry.
K Monte
Babblemur's comments are right on target. I work as an election official and that's how I met him. A person has to be extremely detail oriented to properly do the job, and the most detailed part of it comes after 12-13-14 hours of work. It is exacting work, and yes, mistakes happen. Every crew I have worked with in Oshkosh aims for 100% accuracy. Pam Ubrig does a wonderful and careful job.
I don't know about Babblemur, but when a person only does a job twice a year, it takes incredible concentration to do it exactly how it needs to be done. In my case I'm part Norwegian and don't dare take a three day weekend lest I have to be retrained.
I can see how poking fun at someone's tie would lighten the mood. I bet the lawyer wore that tie intentionally so he could be the butt of a few people's sorry attempts at lightening the mood, eh? We now see the character of at least 2 of the recount observers.
Just a quickie before work. Two things transpired today. Amy has, by Teresa's admition, been objecting to and getting ballots pulled because they only have one signature. Dan has done the same to a lesser degree in this instance. As it turns out, case law states that only one signature is required and those ballots should have been counted. They are still being pulled and set aside until the OASD attorney can check the cases. Also, the absentee ballots Dan has objected to because they are missing applications, have been accepted by canvassers anyway. Turns out through case law, that they should have been tossed if there is no application on file. Also there was a ballot that was recreated from district 11 in district 17's ballot bag. A voter in Town of Utica was "forced" to vote in Winneconee instead of Oshkosh where he/she belonged. He/she pointed it out and was still given a Winneconnee ballot. There were a couple of other legal issues presented today as well as mechanical problems. This isn't about conspiracies, it is about many questions that are not being answered.
My gosh. I should have known that mentioning the tie would get me chastized. You weren't there so you have no idea what transpired. I was going to defend myself but feel that it is fruitless to because that will be picked apart too. You weren't there so don't judge the situation. It wasn't about insulting nor were any of the comments.
K Monte
That's odd, Ms. Monte, as I don't hear you "asking" any questions. Your reports and comments to date have contained suggestions of irregularities (real and imagined), accusations of improprieties and bias as well as other snide remarks, all of which you appear to be attempting to backpedal from in this last post. This is not "asking questions", it is a passive aggressive method to influence those who may not be following this as closely as you. It is as plain as day for anyone to see and for you to claim otherwise insults the intelligence of the voting public.
It would be much easier for you to claim that you were simply "looking for answers to questions" if you were actually asking questions instead of pointing out where you feel those you agree with are being slighted at every turn.
I'm starting to hope this ends up as a lawsuit too, so Dan Becker and his team (Melanie Bloechl, Paul Esslinger, The Montes, Dennis McHugh and others) can show us their true colors: protectors of the taxpayer until it gets in the way of their ego or political ambitions. Legal fees for the district will be WELL over $10,000 for the recount phase alone, I'd imagine. I'm with Tony in thinking that the high road should be taken here- instead, Mr. Becker is building a lawsuit and the only real winner is going to be his lawyer.
Mrs. Monte acts as if there is no cost to the district involved in this recount.
She said "As for cost, apparently Teresa Collins and the others employed by the district work for free any other day? You fail to mention that the cost includes salaries of people getting paid by the district anyway regardless of which room they are in and the tasks they are doing."
It is true, they are paid whether they're doing this recount or something else. But clearly while they are busying themselves with this recount, their other work is not getting done or someone else is doing it, meaning their own work is then left to sit. One way or another it is an expense.
I'm not suggesting the recount should not have been done. But I take exception with someone who purports to be so intelligent and financially savvy but who then turns around and suggests to the public that this is costing us nothing.
Anonymous 9:42, it is not a conspiracy theory. It is my OPINION as a parent of three children in the district, who is also aware of rights to privacy, that people should not be allowed to meander wherever they like around district offices. Would you let anyone peruse your checkbook or medical file? I think not. I know Teresa is an employee of CESA 6, she was doing CESA work during the recount, but that does not give her the right to wander through offices. We all sign in at the door, and I would think the expectation is to be where you claim you belong. I realize she also has friends in the administration. I recommend setting an appointment, after all the Superintendent has told me repeatedly how very busy district administrators are and it would be rude to prevent them from accomplishing the business of the district. BTW did you ever think the State Elections Board knows a tad more than the OASD attorney??? I do agree with your last point.
Anonymous 10:40am, you need to look up the word rhetoric. It means speaking usually publically and sometimes as a means to pursuade. By those definitions, you are correct. I would add Mrs. Thiel would also fall under that definition.
Anonymous 5:05, I have asked questions of this situation. Occassionally I do ask something during the proceedings. The notes I am typing come from a variety of people who have agreed to keep track of the proceedings as Ms. Collins has a lot to do and can't disseminate the info right away. I am interested to know what you think was imagined since I am only reporting what has been objected to and not all of it is mine. Does that count as a question? Your accusations are interesting for two reasons. 1. Where do you think Dan is building a lawsuit? 2. Why is Teresa Thiel not included in this introspection as she clearly qualifies for the charges you are making against me? Considering the lack of info about Amy's team, I can guess. Unless you can somehow prove that no one here including yourself is biased, your arguments are a little questionable at best.
Is Mrs. Monte saying that Dan Becker is being advised by the State Elections Board? There are an impartial body and cannot legally advise anyone. they can offer what the laws say but if this is what Mrs. Monte believes qualifies as his advisers, I am not sure why he needs an attorney of his own. I also don't know why Mr. Becker would be ruled against on different objections.
As to the comment about Mrs. Thiel making an appointment, how does Mrs. Monte know an appointment was not made.
The Montes have such a high opinion of themselves that they act like they know everything. But they both lost an election because people were not sold on their concepts. Doesn't that tell them something?
Mr. Becker's own comments would lead people to believe he is building a lawsuit. He says he has many options, one of which is legal. Since he has not ruled out filing suit and already has a lawyer with him for the recount it sure looks like that's what he's considering.
Anonymous 6:16,
I was going to post something snippy as a means of showing how stupid these arguments were, but thought better of it. I won't sink to the level of some anonymous posters.
If anyone says a nice thing about Dan, they are attacked. I sit with him and talk to him, I am attacked. Get a grip.
How is anything like that productive?
Dan has spoken to the State Elections Board to ask questions. I have as well. That is advising. No one said he has them on retainer nor are they replacing council of an attorney. What was left out of anonymous 6:16's comments is that Amy also has an attorney.
If Mrs. Thiel set that many appointments with that many people, I would be shocked that Amy even listed her as someone who could be there in her place.
If anyone acts like they know everything, it is posters like you. I know I am not an expert on recount procedures, that is why I am there, to learn. Try it sometime, learning that is.
Ballots are legal documents and those legal documents have my name on them. I want to know what is going on with them and whose hands are all over them. Any of the other candidates could be there with attorneys, by the way.
I don't consider myself a loser in this race. For a community that thinks the other guy's vote is good enough (apx 20% turnout), I think I did rather well for someone with no donations footing my bills and whom few people knew. I had nearly 3000 people who liked my ideas. Who knows, I had such a great experience this time around, maybe I'll run again. As always, I respect your opinion and thank you for posting, albite anonymously. I would hope you would at least try to respect others' opinions, even if you don't agree.
Mrs. Monte, you have missed the point. You said in another post that Dan's advisers know more than everyone in that room combined, including the district's attorney. That made it sound like they are HIS personal advisers. You can not get upset with people for jumping on that comment.
If these "advisers" from the State Elections Board have such vast knowledge and are correct about everything they say, why are so many of Mr. Becker's objections not being honored other than to note the objection and, for all intents and purposes, ignore it?
The other comment was if he is getting such good advice from the Elections Board, there should be no need for an attorney. After all, you would think he would have all the answers he needs between the SEB and their election guide.
These are the things I think you've missed while busy writing snide comments to people about how they should try learning things.
It may interest you to know that some of us have been through this process before and understand it as well, if not better than you. Don't make the automatic assumption that because someone is not present they are somehow uninterested, unintelligent, uninformed or all of the above.
I apologize for jumping the gun, my frustration and exhaustion are showing. I looked back and realize how my comments could have been misconstrued if someone were only looking at them in the negative. My point was that the State Elections board knows more about recounts than everyone in the room, as nearly everyone has openly admitted they have never been through this and/or never seen this.
The objections were not being honored because the district lawyer believed certain things about election laws and procedures. No one really knew one way or another until Dan's lawyer looked up case law and presented it to Tony today to reevaluate how the objections were handled. He is going to look into it and make a determination, and no they will not have to start over. One pieve of advice Dan got was, when in doubt have it marked for evaluation later. In this case, it was a good idea to be a little picky. Some ballots that both candidates objected to will be counted. Others that were not supposed to be counted because of identifying info being missing, may get pulled.
SEB does not give out legal advice. They explain statutes and procedures and offer possible ideas. You do with them what you will. And that is meant to be a cliche, not a snide remark.
Funny how my expressing my opinions is snide, but anyone else can say what they want. I would humbly ask that if you are so learned, please enlighten us with procedure in the name of accuracy. Assuming your information and experience is unbiased because this is a tough crowd. I know I would appreciate more information.
Mrs. Monte, I did not say your information on recounts was inaccurate. I simply wanted to point out that I took exception to your remark about trying to learn sometime. I found that to be uncalled for and presumptuous. That's all.
I would like to reply to all the questions, comments etc but there are too many to remember and I don't have time to go back and get them all put I will address those that stuck out. Mrs. Monte says Amy has a lawyer... really who might that be, I have heard no mention of a lawyer and Amy has never said to me that she has one, Mrs. Monte when did Amy say she has a lawyer and what is this lawyers name?
Michelle Monte said:
"Amy has, by Teresa's admition, been objecting to and getting ballots pulled because they only have one signature. Dan has done the same to a lesser degree in this instance." Well how many did Dan asked pulled for one signature and how many did Amy ask to be pulled for one signature?
Who first asked to have the ballot pulled because there was only one poll workers signature? Dan did.
Who asked Mr. Rennig "it says the ballot may be invalid if there are not two poll workers signatures, does the fact that the word may is used mean they don't have to be declared invalid?" Amy did. Who said "I'm willing to count all the ballots with only one signature if we are consistent and count them all?" Amy did...
This recount is no longer about making sure every vote is counted, it is now about invalidating as many votes a possible...Dan asked that absentee ballots be declared invalid because the voter signed with a pencil, because they signed on the wrong line and because the witness did not list their address. The attorney present said "the law only requires that there be a signature and a witness signature" so the canvass board agreed to count the ballots but the fact is every time any of the above issues came up he objected to the ballots being counted, he even object to ballots being counted for what HE himself called "clerical errors".
"It MUST be noted that some of the ballots that Dan has objected to and were tossed were votes for HIM and not Amy. He has thrown HIS votes out. " Actually according to Amy, when the pulling of ballots with only one signature began, Dan pulled the ones that had votes for Amy, so then Amy pulled them if they had votes for Dan. While I was standing in for Amy, I did not ask that one be pulled because it had a vote for both Amy and Dan so it really didn't make any difference if it was pulled or not. That is when Dan said he wanted it on the record that he pulled a ballot that had a vote for him... that was true BUT he didn't say that that ballot ALSO had a vote for Amy... I saw the ballot, Mrs. Monte did NOT.
Mr. Monte said:
"The challenges are legitimate and equal from both sides."
Once the minutes are official and public record I will get a copy and I hope that Tony will post them here so everyone can read ALL the objections, see who made them and decide for yourself, first were the challenges "equal from both sides"? and was this recount about making sure every vote was counted or was this about throwing out as many votes as possible?
Mrs. Monte said:
"A voter in Town of Utica was "forced" to vote in Winneconee instead of Oshkosh where he/she belonged. He/she pointed it out and was still given a Winneconnee ballot."
Mr. Becker wanted all the votes in the town declared invalid...
First of all it was the town of Vinland, second, this person called Dan but wants to remain anonymous because according to Dan "he is a prominent small business owner in the town." Mrs. Monte missed "the rest of the story" according to the Vinland town clerk this person lives on the town line and in the past "has always voted in the Oshkosh school district" the person this time said they lived in the Winneconne school district but were given the Oshkosh school district ballot and they voted. He called them after voting and complained and they moved him to the correct school district The County Clerk called the Elections Board and they said nothing could be done since he already voted.
Mrs. Monte said:
"EVERY ward prior to the initial thing had the initials ABS. Dan asked that the ballots without be marked, they were still counted"
Dan objected to counting the absentee ballot in the entire WARD and asked that all the absentee ballots in that WARD be marked invalid, yes the votes were counted because the board of canvassers ruled that they would accept the ballots his objection notwithstanding.
Mrs. Monte said:
"Mrs Thiel is clearly writing what she wants to see happen even when she isn't there to see it or can she see into the board room from Heilmann's and other's offices (I hope student files weren't just laying around since anyone seems to have access these days)"
"that does not give her the right to wander through offices."
Thought about not bothering to respond to this but since it borders on saying I am wandering around central office snooping in empty offices I felt I really should respond...I was in Dr. Heilmann's office ONCE during this recount, briefly to speak with him while he was in there. I have never and would NEVER enter someone's office if they were not in there. I also briefly stepped into Mr. Pouba's office to speak to him, while he was IN his office. Other than that I spoke with a few people I know in Central Office in the hall outside the board room. So all student files safe (besides all confidential information in the district is kept in locked files, that is the law). Tell me why Mrs. Monte felt the need to write those comments, yet she complains she is being attacked. Mrs. Monte why would you say I "wander through offices" whose office did I "wander through?"
My last response to Mrs. Monte's comment... she said "As for cost, apparently Teresa Collins and the others employed by the district work for free any other day? You fail to mention that the cost includes salaries of people getting paid by the district anyway regardless of which room they are in and the tasks they are doing."
Fact: Mrs. Collins is the ONLY one of 6 people who have been there every day that is a school district employee...there are the two other members of the board of canvassers, two poll workers who feed all the ballots into the machine and the attorney. There is another person who tabulates, some days that job was done by a district employee and sometimes by a non-district employee" OF courset the attorney makes the most per hour, I beleive the rest (non-district employees) are paid $8.50 per hour, by my count, this has taken approximately 42 hours and it isn't over yet, that is $1,400+ for the two poll workers and the two board of canvass people. Don't know the lawyer's hourly rate but at say $200 (I would guess it is more but I don't know) that would be $8,000+. I don't object to the recount but all the objections to invalidate so many ballots takes a great deal of time which does cost money and are not attempts to have a vote count, but rather to have it thrown out... so what if the signature is in pencil?
Finally in answer to Tony's question as to why so much tension, it is hard to explain but I bet if you took aside any of the individual involved like the town clerks they would tell you things were not always civil if you can read body language you would see that.
I will give you one example that happened today that I think just goes to character. As the recount votes were read by Mrs. Collins in one ward Mr. Becker's total stayed the same from election night to the recount, as Mrs. Collins read Mrs. Weinsheims votes and she lost 3 votes in that ward Mr. Becker loudly exclaims "YES" that is mean spirited. Mrs. Weinsheim is not even keeping track of her votes and where she stands and she certainly has not made any such display when she has gained or he has lost votes.
I really wish this had been televised like the Tower/Mattox recount so people could see for themselves. Mr. Beckers tone many times is not even civil and very demanding. At one point today the ballot machine jammed several times and after 4 or 5 jams (Mrs. Weinsheim commented that perhaps it was jamming because the ballots were curled at the corner,) Mr. Becker said "I demand this machine be replaced".
Enough, I am very weary but I felt the need to reply and since there were so many things to clarify this is a very long post, sorry but thanks to those of you who read to the end.
The board of canvassers will reconvene in Open Session on Monday at 3pm and will rule on Dan's objections they haven't ruled on yet and will probably be prepared to certify the election. I doubt that will be the end of it, I hope I'm wrong.
Teresa Thiel
Kent Monte wrote:
"The environment is more of a partisan arena"
Well when one party (Dan) has the chairperson of the Winnebago County Republican Party sit at his table and the other party (Amy) has friends and family at her table, who do you think is making it a partisan arena?
Frankly I can do without the "fake" friendliness. I really don't want someone to pretend to be all nicey nicey to me and then I come home and read they are accusing me of wandering through the offices of the district looking for student files. It is insulting, and nasty I'd love to know why Michelle felt the need to write it. Could it be because there are actually people in Central Office that enjoy talking to me, is that what is really bothering you Michelle? Get over it, these people have known me for over 6 years they know that I respect what they do. If I want to have a conversation with someone in the hall or even in their office, I will, there is NO law against it.
Teresa Thiel
Teresa says, "Once the minutes are official and public record I will get a copy and I hope that Tony will post them here so everyone can read ALL the objections, see who made them and decide for yourself, first were the challenges "equal from both sides"? and was this recount about making sure every vote was counted or was this about throwing out as many votes as possible?"
I'll be happy to post them!! Many thanks to you and Michelle for offering your detailed observations.
P.S. I agree with you that it would have been nice for the recount to be televised. Now that I think about it, the televising of the Tower/Mattox DID have a positive impact on the collegiality of it.
I'm pretty sure OCAT televises city happenings for free but the district would have to pay OCAT to televise this (I could be wrong about that but I know when I was on the board there was a cost for OCAT to televise special board meetings etc.)
Teresa Thiel
Teresa,
I would like to thank you for taking the time to 'clear' some things up over the past few days. But you seem to have mistaken some of the comments. The votes Dan objected to that were his happened on Friday and Monday. You were not there so you can not speak for it. Michelle was so that is why she did. Either way, the official minutes will clear it up.
Amy doesn't have a lawyer? Seems like she had one there when the bag was objected to on Tuesday. The official minutes will reveal that too. If she didn't get a lawyer, that is her decision. But seems to me that Amy has the district administration and other board members supporting her throughout the procedings so maybe she thinks that she doesn't need one? (No, it isn't a conspiricy theory, just an observation)
The other thing that I will bring up is about where you call into question Dan's character. YOU were seen celebrating when Dan lost votes in Nekimi. Don't be the pot calling the kettle black. Was it inappropriate for Dan to celebrate? Yes, but don't criticize and then do it yourself.
I was sincere with my attempt towards civility while we were both there. I don't feel that the tension should be that high but it was unavoidable (from both sides).
At least the count is now over. Now it is up to the canvassers and the attorney to decide the objections and compare to the case law that was presented. We will hear the results on Monday and move forward from there.
Happy Friday to all.
K Monte
There are those that wish to continue to compare the Tower/Mattox recount to that of Becker/Weinsheim recount with regard to "civility". There are obvious differences that seem to have escaped many.
First the recount for Mattox/Tower was during a hottly contested race both of these candidates shared the same ideas, and vision for the city. Conversely, the Becker/Weinsheim recount has occured after a highly contested race, many candidates forums, and nasty blog postings. these two candidates ARE very different in both their ideas and vision.
I can only imagine how exhausted both candidates are, and with that comes some loss of what some view as civility. Frankly, I saw two committed candidates doing the best they could under difficult circumstances. there will also be those that wish to stir the pot, critize and find fault, human nature I guess.
I have learned a great deal observing this process, and I have a greater appreciation for all parties that have participated at any level to make this recount possible.
Melanie Bloechl
Civility is civility, no matter what side of the fence you're on. There is no reason for rudeness, pickiness (bordering on unreasonableness), or childish behaviors. People can have differing opinions and visions, yet be respectful. That did not happen here.
Anonymous 10:12,
How do you know?? Were you there?
I was, and there is a lack of civility on both sides. Some of the reason is Dan's lack of sleep, but that is no excuse. I don't know Amy so I can't speak for her. If you were there, fine. If not, don't tell us that were there whether one was civil and why.
K Monte
Mr. Monte, I wrote the post at 10:12 and wish to point out that you have once again shown how defensive you are. Did I mentioned any person's name in that post? NO, I did not. Personally, I think that asking an entire bag of votes to be tossed is unreasonable and Mr. Becker did that. But I made general comments about the entire process and singled out no one. Are you naturally this defensive or does it come from getting your butt kicked as badly as you did in the election? Oh that's right, you were on the defensive BEFORE the election. That's part of why you lost I bet.
Melanie,
I'm not sure I agree that Tower and Mattox "shared the same ideas, and vision for the city." I think they certainly evolved into that (or de-volved, depending on one's point of view), but at the time many of us thought that Shirley's neighborhood and "smart growth" agenda placed her at odds with Frank's more chamber of commerce friendly views. I know that you were not a big fan of the NICE group that Shirley was a part of, so it makes sense that you would have seen her and Frank as having similar visions. Sure, they were not as far apart as Becker/Weinsheim, but there was a difference that was recognized by the inside power brokers.
Case in point: I recall at the time of the recount that Jon Dell'Antonia had some real doubts about Mattox, and I remember they were not thrilled when she pulled ahead in the recount.
Anyway, I'm sure we just have different perspectives on that election. I still maintain that the presence of the tv cameras made it more civil, and I think such a presence would have helped out with Becker/Weinsheim too.
I distinctly remember Kent Monte saying someplace else that he was not at the recount the whole time. His comments now indicate he has knowledge that others might not, giving the impression he was there every day from start to finish and further giving the impression that other commenters weren't. What arrogance.
What is it about the Monte duo? By the comments they make and positions they take on everything under the sun they seem to have appointed themselves the arbiters of what others in this city can and can not say. I know Dan Becker has an attorney in this recount matter. I didn't know he hired the Monte Bodyguard and PR Firm too.
Kent,
Dan didn't lose any votes in Nekimi so why would I celebrate? Nekimi--- Dan election night 91, recount 91!
I might have celebrated that it was over Nekimi was the last of the recounts. And I certainly didn't pump my arms in the air and shout YES!
What did Amy do that was uncivilized or nasty? The two days I was there I did not see Amy demand that anyone do anything --- Dan demanded the voting machine be removed and many comments about Poll workers "who do they have working these places anyway" said in the presence of two POLLWORKERS!!
Maybe Dan objected on Mon. and Tues. but he also made a big deal out of it on Wed. that he was pulling a ballot that had a vote for him, but as I stated before, it also had a vote for Mrs. Weinsheim, so it was no magnaimous gesture on his part!
The weirdest thing of all is that there were a number of ballots where people voted for both Becker and Weinsheim given what Mrs. Bloechel wrote about the candidates philosophies etc.which I agree with, it is amazing to me that there was more than one voter who voted for both Becker and Weinsheim --- go figure.
Teresa Thiel
rpI can't wait for the minutes of the last week's proceeding to come out so the Montes can finally shut up (at least about this recount). I only wonder how they will spin it when the comments they've made thus far are proven inaccurate in the minutes. They'll probably chalk it up to a conspiracy. Besides, only Mrs. Monte's minutes are the real deal.
Teresa,
I would highly recommend we not travel down the road of which candidate did nasty, inconsiderate, immature, or rude things in that room, Amy's list would not be as short as you portray. Neither Dan nor Amy was at thier best.
Anonymous 12:05,
Any time you would like a side by side comparison of notes from anything I have written, call me and we'll sit down and compare notes. I find it amazing that you want me to shut up, but not Teresa Thiel. Hmmm, I wonder why??? So much for complaints about biases.
Am I defensive about anything, maybe. So, what. I am human, deal with it. We don't all have to agree with everyone all the time. Welcome to the real world. Debate and dissention brings change and understanding. We can agree to disagree, without trashing anyone. But if some insist on continuing down that road, you reap what you sow and you never know if anonymous monikers really protect you. We can speculate all we want about candidates and elections, the fact is no one has all the information and anyone can slant it in whatever direction they want. C'est la vie
Tony,
Your view point is certainly from a different prospective. But you are correct what candidates say during campaigns, and what they actually do once elected CAN do totally diiferent ball games.
To clarify however, you stated I wasn't a fan of the NICE group, I had concerns about the single issue mentality. And as it has played out over the years, I would say that I was on track.
We do both agree that Mattox/Tower are indeed to date, mirror images of one another, both in vision and vote. I guess that is up to each person that actually votes to determine if this is a positive or negative.
Melanie Bloechl
Mrs. Monte, the difference is Mrs. Thiel and others don't go after people in general with their comments and they don't read into things that are said like you and your husband do. Case in point: His remarks to someone from earlier today. You 2 have a history and reputation for general defensiveness. Since the election it has worsened. People are talking about it and they're sick of it. Sorry but that's the way it is. C'est la vie for sure.
Anonymous 2:47,
If I am the only one reading into comments, why is it then that I have to continually clarify my comments? Today was no exception. I shouldn't have to defend anything that I say but it really doesn't matter how I put it, someone takes it the wrong way and I have to clear it up. Even when I try and do that, someone else comes right after that one and does it again.
I have discovered that there are those out there that are posting repeatedly under the anonymous moniker to provoke others. And yes, I can prove it.
Take my comments how ever you want them. I have not and will not intentionally insult another person. So if you take it that way, I can't help it.
Have a wonderful afternoon, it is really a lovely day.
K Monte
"I have to continually clarify my comments"
That is called being defensive.
Mr. Monte thinks he can PROVE an Anonymous is repeatedly posting under Anonymous to provoke others. It couldn't possibly be different people sharing their thoughts, could it? Not according to the almighty Monte. This is nothing more than scare tactics so people won't post. Some may fall for that but not all. But even if it was the same person so what? The points would still be just as valid.
By the way, "anonymous" is not a moniker ("name or nickname").
Enjoying the day,
///sunshine///
Yup his wife tried the same thing earlier. Birds of a feather...
Does Mr. Monte's last comment mean he's getting provoked? Goody!!!! I would hate to think all these comments were in vain.
Did you other anonymouses know that anonymouses CAN be tracked???
Anonymous 5:14, your level of maturity and display of intelligence is overwhelming. Please hold something back for tomorrow. One does not want to burn up ones last functioning brain cell too soon, would one? That, I think, is premature cranio-jaculation. There may be a cure for that.
Oh yes, we've heard all about that. It's not common practice for a site operator to share such info with just anyone, especially with no good reason.
Off to buy a pump to cure my "problem". C'ya lada.
Michelle Monte wrote:
"We can agree to disagree, without trashing anyone"
If only she could... Michelle you never answered the question of why you felt the need to write that I wander into offices and you hoped student files were put away... if that isn't an attempt to "trash" someone I don't know what you call it and can you see through walls to see me in offices I wasn't in?
Please don't pretend that you are above "trashing" people, your own comments prove differently.
Teresa Thiel
Mrs. Thiel, you are exactly right. The Montes each have a habit of not answering questions they get called on and don't have good responses to. They each also like to talk about taking the high road but rarely practice what they preach. They're good at trying to discourage negative comments though.
Kent and Michelle Monte have each made comments on here about people hiding behind the "anonymous" name. He even went so far as to say some of the same people are posting multiple times to provoke others. Provoke others? Doubtful. Try defending their position. If a response is made to something someone has written and the original commenter disagrees with it it makes perfect sense that they'd want to respond. Instead of grasping that simple fact Kent "Dick Tracy" Monte says "I have discovered that there are those out there that are posting repeatedly under the anonymous moniker to provoke others. And yes, I can prove it" and his wife Michelle says "But if some insist on continuing down that road, you reap what you sow and you never know if anonymous monikers really protect you."
Do they really expect us to believe that they have access to information about Mr. Palmeri's blog site or that he would share it with them if he had it himself? Even if they did, so what!!! This blog allows anonymous postings so the point they're trying to make is what exactly? It's nothing more than a poorly disguised attempt to discourage people from commenting and to try to one-up those that are. They talk about voter intimidation at the polls (yeah, right!). How about blogger intimidation. The smugness and self righteousness displayed by these two is sickening.
I don't the Monte's have access to information about Mr. Palmeri's blog site, but I bet Alberto Gonzalez does. DOJ's gonnna be thrilled with that LSD post, Tony.
Where was Monte asked about why anyone was wandering. I think the statement about the possibility of private files being out would answer that, duh.
"If a response is made to something someone has written and the original commenter disagrees with it it makes perfect sense that they'd want to respond."
Isn't that called being defensive, anonymous? Isn't that what the Monte's are getting blamed for doing? Oh, it is okay for anonymouses, but not Montes. Glad I am anonymous, I can freely sink to lower depths.
"They're good at trying to discourage negative comments though."
The Montes are discouraging negative comments? Well damn them to hell. How dare they try to stop negative comments, who do they think they are?
"The smugness and self righteousness displayed by these two is sickening."
And yet, everyone is soooo facinated with them they can't stop talking about them and analyzing their every move and word. Isn't that stalking? At the very least it is obsessive.
I think thsi blog allows anonymous posts to break Tony's monotony of teaching and correcting papers. I know I find it extremely hilarious how much you all can't seem to get enough of the Montes. No, no more (laughing hysterically)!! STOP, I can't take any more.
Sounds like a bunch of children.
"Stop touching me!"
"No your touching me."
"Daddy Tony, she called me a name."
"You started it."
"No, you started it."
"No, I didn't you big Dummy Head."
"I'm telling."
"No, I'm telling."
"She said something bad about me on the blogs."
"No, I didn't. You did."
"Did not."
"Did so."
"Not."
"So."
"NOT!"
"SO!"
"NOT, NOT, NOT."
"SO. SO. SO."
"NOT, INFINITY!"
Post a Comment