Whitehall Mayor Kim Maggard has posted endorsements she’s received from various government officials. This is done to give the appearance, to the casual observer who has not been paying attention down at City Hall, that she has gravitas and the backing of important people. I say, as one who has been watching down at City Hall for the last six years, that there is more to it than meets the eye and so this list needs some understanding and clarification for the voters to more fully understand what is underneath these endorsements.Let me assist.

So, to start, here is her list;

PERSONAL ENDORSEMENTS: (more additions soon)

Whitehall City Attorney Michael Shannon
Whitehall City Auditor Dan Miller
Whitehall Council President Jim Graham
Whitehall City Council member Chris Rodriguez
Whitehall City Council member Larry Morrison
Whitehall City Council member Van Gregg
Whitehall City Council member Karen Conison
Whitehall City Council member Bob Bailey
Whitehall School Board President Walter Armes
Whitehall School Board Vice President Blythe Wood
Whitehall School Board member Michael Adkins
Whitehall School Board member Joy Bivens
Whitehall Future Attorney Michael Bivens
U.S. Representative Joyce Beatty
Ohio Representative Heather Bishoff

As well, there was this too from Mayor Maggard;

“Many of you are asking, ‘Mayor, who do you endorse for council positions and city treasurer?” Read on.
RE-ELECT BOB BAILEY, Council-at-Large; he is thoughtful and thinks before he speaks. He sees the big picture about moving Whitehall forward. He’s not hesitant to approach and discuss his concerns.
RE-ELECT KAREN CONISON, Council-at-Large; her involvement in the community is not due to her running for any office. She’s been involved long before she was on city council and does it for the good of the community. She doesn’t bash nor gossip. She knows what is takes to run the city and exemplifies teamwork.
ELECT STEVE QUINCEL, Treasurer. His common sense and positive approach to solving problems is refreshing. His qualifications are out of this world. He is responsible with his own money and will do the same for yours. Most of all, he genuinely wants to see the City keep progressing.”

So too, on Mayor Maggard’s political Facebook page under this post, Cheryl Jo Thompson, the leader of Issue 32, the successful effort to recall Councilperson Jacquelyn Thompson (no relation) unabashedly added this regarding Mayor Maggard’s endorsements;

“THIS list speaks volumes to the competency and value of our Mayor Kim Maggard’s work thus far and in the future! ALL of these people know and have worked with the Mayor and her opponent at one point or another and stand strong in endorsing Mayor Maggard! This is loud and clear!! RE-ELECT Mayor Kim Maggard!”

Okay, fine. If the Mayor’s endorsements speak “loud and clear!!” to the “competency and value” of her work now and in the future and Mayor Maggard writes so glowingly about those who support her, allow me to examine (serving as an alternate viewpoint) who some of these people are that bring such importance to her credentials, past the name on the desk, what they have done, and how connected they all are to each other through their checkbooks. Let’s start with City Attorney Mike Shannon…

City Attorney Michael T. Shannon

Donated to:

Kim Maggard, $200

Cheryl Jo Thompson’s ‘Issue 32’, $150

Donations received:

Jim Graham, $35

Van Gregg, $50

Bob Bailey, $60

Chris Rodriguez, $25

• Mr. Shannon ignores conflicts of interest to serve his own needs.
  

• Mr. Shannon uses the word ‘litigation’ to send a chilling effect to both Council and citizens, effectively abusing the power of his office against those ignorant of law to quash rightful inquiry for the citizens and their representative’s knowledge and benefit.

• Mr. Shannon couldn’t supply me with proof of a law (nor the Mayor his verbal opinion) that overturned or overruled the Supreme Court decision, Camara v Municipal Court, which specifically detailed the do’s and don’ts of code officers on private property. This after code officers were photographed on private property without permission or a warrant right here in Whitehall. His muddled claim outside the proof of law essentially admitted then that there was no law.

• When I brought a well-researched, thoroughly detailed four page flier, with footnotes, into a council meeting, detailing the corruption present in the Wolfe administration, Mike Shannon decided that the real problem was me and proceeded to minimize and marginalize my efforts to expose the actions and behavior of John Wolfe, himself and others who are part of the problem at City Hall.

  He said;

“I take exception to anybody who takes shots at my mayor.” “What we have here is a frustrated thespian who has finally found the forum where you can wax eloquently without fear of a director yelling ‘cut’ or without fear of contradiction, where talent is of non-consequence and truth is certainly a fleeting proposition”

Not one of my representatives on council had the political courage to defend me against the city attorney’s attack. Not one. Perhaps the donation numbers shown here may shed some light on that.

• After the Charter Review Commission (appointed by the council) recommended ending term limits in 2013, it was placed on the ballot, for the third time. A committee was formed by Steve Quincel, current candidate for City Treasurer, and among the donors were City Attorney Michael Shannon and Mayor Kim Maggard, each donating $300 apiece. (Those who would enjoy the greatest benefit from its passage). In a Dispatch article at the time, it stated, ‘Mayor Kim Maggard said term limits also hinder the city’s ability to attract young professionals for elected jobs, including the treasurer, auditor and city attorney spots. “It’s hard to attract anyone into those positions if they cannot have a career there”, Maggard said’.

Career politicians. Don’t we have enough of these causing us problems?

Auditor Dan Miller

Donated to:

Kim Maggard, $250

Donations received:

Kim Maggard, $350

Karen Conison, $20

Jim Graham, 20

Van Gregg, $75

• There have been two citizens, one of them me, who, when speaking to Mr. Miller of our concern that code officers were stepping onto our properties without permission or a warrant, were then asked by him if we had ‘No Trespassing’ signs posted. Mr. Miller essentially made excuses for City Hall’s scofflaw behavior. It is the law enforcers duty to know the lawful parameters of their job, not mine to tell them. My ‘No Trespassing’ signs are there for the casual citizen. They are not there to inform city officials what their job is nor what my rights are.

Council President Jim Graham

Donated to:

Kim Maggard, $175

Cheryl Jo Thompson’s ‘Issue 32’, $50

• Mr. Graham is a controlling authoritarian, afraid to let his fellow Americans live in the liberty guaranteed them by the U.S. Constitution because he’d lose the power that keeps control over those he wishes to. When suggested that council consider a moratorium on code enforcement until the code office, the Mayor, etc. can become more respectful and lawful, Mr Graham blurted out that “chaos!” would ensue. Mr. Graham doesn’t trust others with their right to liberty because their liberty is messier than his and he distrusts their ability to self govern themselves. He fears loss of control and has discomfort with other people doing as they please which doesn’t conform to his standard of acceptable behavior.

• Mr. Graham enabled and excused code enforcement officers stepping onto private property without permission or a warrant by obfuscating code language at a council committee meeting. He suggested that they have a “right” to go onto property if they ‘feel’ there is a problem. This is actually opposite of the 4^th amendment and the Supreme Court’s decision, Camara v Municipal Court, which reaffirmed the 4^th amendment and made specific what is allowable by code officers. Since he’d made this erroneous pronouncement in a public forum I told him I expected him to correct it in a public forum, for the record. He never did.

• When Don Sarubbi (the man who objected to the language on the panhandling signs generalizing that all people who begged for money were alcoholics and drug addicts) and I were going to speak at a council meeting with several people in attendance, Mr. Graham warned Mr. Sarubbi as he walked to the dais that he was gonna shrink the time to address council from three minutes to two because there were a lot of people that might want to speak. As it turned out, it was just Mr. Sarubbi and I. The council’s responsibility and obligation is to listen to everyone that speaks, even were that to last until midnight. Mr. Graham, in truth, disrespected the citizens and their allotted time to address their council not due to the amount of people but because he knew Mr. Sarubbi and I were going to talk about the wrongness of the signage.

Councilperson Chris Rodriguez

Donations accepted;

Bob Bailey, $100

Jim Graham, $25

• Councilman Rodriguez doesn’t understand the true nature of public service. He has served so long I’ve lost count. The charter says one may serve two consecutive four-year terms. Once the last term expires, they can either be appointed if a vacancy opens up or have to wait until the election for the next seat, which could be two years. The spirit of the charter is often dismissed by running for another office halfway through the term. Mr Rodriguez has been elected, appointed and ran from Ward to at-Large and back to Ward again. Thanks in part to being appointed after he lost his run for Treasurer. It has been much more than the consecutive 2 terms of four years each. This is a quote from him in a Dispatch article from the last effort to end term limits was defeated in 2013. See if you can spot the ironic inconsistency in his statement;

“This is the third time it’s gone down. The people want them kept in place, and we have to respect that,” said Councilman Chris Rodriguez, who was re-elected to his fourth term. “We had three races go unopposed, mine being one of them.”

• Councilman Rodriguez has been absent an inordinate amount of time due to his job taking him away. As such, he is not there to do his job as councilman with the maximum attention it deserves for the sake of the citizens. Given that, I sent him a respectful private letter on September 3^rd asking him, for the good of the citizens he’s supposed to represent in Ward One, to resign. It was sent to his home with no c.c. attached. He never replied.

Councilperson Larry Morrison

Donations received:

Kim Maggard, $100

Councilperson Van Gregg

Donated to:

Kim Maggard, $175

Mike Shannon, $50

Bob Bailey, $60

Dan Miller, $75

Donations received:

Kim Maggard $100

Cheryl Jo Thompson, $100

John Wolfe, $250

Bob Bailey, $60

Councilperson Karen Conison

Donations received:

Kim Maggard, $400

• Karen Conison is a good person but doesn’t understand why impartiality matters in her job as the people’s voice. She has unabashedly gushed her affection for the Mayor too many times, I’m afraid to the detriment of the citizens interests she’s supposed to be serving (even to the point of one time saying, “I don’t think I need to tell you how I feel about our Mayor” as if we all knew…and we did!)She is supposed to be impartial for the sake of the citizens, as a citizen how can I trust she’ll be on my side if ‘my side’ is not ‘the Mayors side’? If the Mayor or any of her other friends on council are doing things which aren’t best for the citizens, will Karen have the individuality and courage to oppose them for the sake of the citizens? I honestly don’t believe or trust in her ability to do so.

• When Bob Bailey introduced legislation that would outlaw portable basketball backboards with little time for any public debate, they introduced and voted on it in its debut to the public. Karen voted yes on it but after hearing a couple peoples dissent towards it, afterwards she (admittedly courageously) said she was wrong for having voted yes on it before the citizens got a chance to look at it and debate it (correct)and wished she’d voted no. Unfortunately for the citizens she is supposed to be serving, the time to consider matters that have impact on their lives, as a council representative, is before you vote on it. Karen, as wonderful as she is, usually has 20 pots simmering at any given time. I maintain that the most important one that should receive the lion’s share of her consideration is that of the job the citizens entrusted her to. If she cannot adequately give that the attention and consideration it is due then she has no business doing the many other things which wrongly scatter her focus. Legislator for the citizens first and foremost.

Councilperson Bob Bailey

Donated to:

Kim Maggard, $130

Mike Shannon, $60

Jim Graham, $100

Van Gregg, $60

Chris Rodriguez, $100

Donations received:

Jim Graham, $100

Van Gregg, $60

Cheryl Jo Thompson, $50

• The best way to describe Councilman Bailey is, he’s an authoritarian. He favors and agrees and defends his friends in City Hall over the citizens more than I think is acceptable. Like Mr. Graham, Mr. Bailey likes control and thinks he knows what is best for citizens. His grasp on the Constitution is only as strong as suits him or his friends in City Hall. Too often, when wrong is being perpetrated at City Hall, instead of defending those citizens who are wronged, lifts up and defends his friends, the wrongdoers.

• After Code Officers trespassed on private property without permission or a warrant, I asked for a moratorium on codes. During the meeting that Leslie LaCorte tried valiantly to get at the heart of the matter, Mr. Bailey obfuscated and distracted the conversation by adding pointless remarks, changing the central topic and unabashedly praising code enforcement. What was meant to be a thoughtful, respectful and meaningful conversation to fully understand the problem and bring possible good and uncover wrongs was derailed, thanks in part to Mr. Bailey’s inappropriate behavior.

• Recently, it was Mr. Bailey who introduced legislation that banned portable basketball backboards from being used in the streets. Whatever its merits, the citizens never got to be a part of the discussion over the thing which would impact their lives. The legislation became first available on a Friday or Saturday, three or four days after usually becoming available for inspection. On Tuesday, only three or four days after it was introduced, it was passed, right there at its first and only reading. No discussion, no debate, no input from the community. Secret legislation passed quickly. They wanted it, to hell with the citizens. It was also pre-decided they were going to pass the legislation, regardless of any opposition the citizens might have gotten to add were they given the opportunity. I’m sorry but secret governments do this kind of thing, not governments of the people, by the people, for the people. The only one who saw the wrong of it was Leslie LaCorte who was the sole dissenting vote. So too, this was done without alternate recreational opportunities for the youth. That sort of behavior is not in the best interests of the citizens. It is in the best interest of what Bob Bailey wants, procedures, processes and respect towards the citizens rights be damned.

Candidate for Whitehall Treasurer Steve Quincel

I have no issues with Steve Quincel, I met him and he seems like a genuinely nice person but the reader must know that between himself and his wife, Whitehall Parks and Recreation Board member Katie Quincel (appointed by Kim Maggard) have mutually donated a total of $550 to Kim Maggard.

U.S. Representative Joyce Beaty

Congressperson Beatty is a Democrat, so is Kim Maggard. A straight party-line endorsement.

Ohio Representative Heather Bishoff

Also a Democratic Party line endorsement but;

Donated to:

Kim Maggard, $250

Donations received:

Kim Maggard, $200

So, while ordinarily these endorsements could be looked on as simply being what they are, as you see, there is so much more to take from them. Specifically, the inter-donating to one another, that which they can’t seem to help but give money to each other and support one another. It undermines their credibility and trust as leaders with their endorsements for each other because we don’t know if they’re saying it because they mean it or they’re saying it because they gave each other money or simply because they’re party supporters or because they’re friends. It is rife with conflicts of interest for many reasons but in particular when citizens can’t or won’t be heard by them, specifically those who criticize them or one of their fellow donors. Therefore, due to the complete absence of impartiality involved in a lot of these endorsements, as well as some of their questionable character, the validity of them must not be allowed such simple consideration and must be questioned. When Cheryl Jo Thompson offers forth her statement of unabashed worship for Mayor Maggard, can we trust that it has true depth or that it is free from the strings attached to her with Kim Maggard having made chili for her committee’s Issue 32 fundraiser or the $200 she herself has donated to Kim Maggard? Can we trust any of them when they endorse Mayor Maggard as the right one for Whitehall when so many of them are connected by so much political money? Is it due to real and concrete endorsements of her actions and record? (What are those, in detail by the way (outside of hyperbolic cheerleading) and when do we get to read them all as written by these people themselves?) When there is questionable behavior by one or another of them and they say nothing about it, can we trust that we’re getting a balanced critical review of her performance as mayor with these endorsements, or is it just a peppermint facade constructed to bedazzle and fool the voters? I don’t care if they are elected officials, they’re still only flawed human beings with a title. With the monetary strings attached I don’t believe we can trust anything they say. Particularly given their record of silence in light of their friends sometimes shameful behavior. I don’t believe many of them (not all) can be trusted so, given all of the above, I claim this list is largely shallow, empty and merely self-serving.

(note: more will be explained regarding a ‘familial’ connection in another post)