Myers' Scandal Is Simply Stunning

For the past fifteen months, Cathy Myers and her staff have spent the majority of their time attacking Randy "IronStache" Bryce.  They have falsely accused Randy of misogyny, have poor-shamed him and dredged up 20 year old traffic tickets in an order to paint him as the new Antichrist or something.

At first, I thought she might have gone so far negative because she couldn't get any traction on her own.  While that probably did play a large part of it, the real reason turns out to be that she was trying to keep everyone's attention diverted from her own major scandal.  This scandal sounds like something that is the cross between a Jerry Springer show and Judge Judy.

Even though it's been going on for several months, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Mary Spicuzza and Dan Bice finally got around to covering a lawsuit filed against Dennis Hughes, Myers' live in campaign manager.  The lawsuit was filed by Myers' then boyfriend and Hughes' former lawyer, Roger Merry.

The gist of the lawsuit is that Hughes did not pay Merry for legal fees from Merry representing him in a lawsuit against the Janesville School Board, which Myers sits on.  But as I am prone to point out, there's more.  There's always more (emphasis mine):

Starting in 2015, the messy legal battle involved Myers' now-campaign manager, Dennis Hughes, and her then-boyfriend, Roger Merry.

Critics say the case presented a clear conflict for Myers. They suggest Myers was improperly forwarding school board information to Merry and siding with Hughes in his open records dispute.

"This is a disgrace to the school board and is deeply concerning to me as a former elected official in the First Congressional District," said former Kenosha County Supervisor Leah Blough, a Bryce supporter.

In 2015, Hughes was a union representative for AFSCME who sued the district over its refusal to release records. Merry, an attorney, agreed to represent Hughes in the lawsuit. And Myers was living with Merry in his Janesville home.

Hughes was also a friend of both Merry and Myers, and had lived with them in their large Janesville home.

Before he went to court, the school district took the unusual step of getting a temporary restraining order against Hughes. It was later dismissed.

Hughes eventually won the records lawsuit and got a $15,000 settlement agreement from the district.

But the money still sits in a trust account overseen by Merry, who has declined to turn over the cash to Hughes. Merry has sued Hughes, saying the money is owed to him for legal fees, even though there was no written contract. He and Myers are no longer together.

So we have Myers who sent emails from the board, including closed meeting items, to her live in boyfriend. Said boyfriend became the lawyer for Hughes, who was living with both Myers and Merry at the time. Eventually, Merry was able to use the information in these emails to get Hughes a $15,000 settlement.

As for the restraining order, Hughes said that it was completely unjustified. This is not true. Hughes has already a record of being convicted for disorderly conduct.

And Myers does not deny sending the emails, despite the glaring conflict of interest:

Myers agreed, saying she felt that the former Janesville administration was hiding things from the public. She offered a succinct explanation as to why she forwarded a note about the order to Merry from her public account. Merry was not representing Hughes at the time.

"I thought it was bullshit," Myers said. "I felt an injustice was happening.

"There was an injustice going on, and there were attempts that were being made by the administration to cover it up and conceal things that shouldn't be concealed," she said. "They were using a harassment restraining order in order to do that, and I thought it was wrong."

Myers tried to further justify her unjustifiable behavior by saying she wouldn't personally benefit from the $15,000 settlement pay out:

A Janesville constituent first raised concerns about Myers' conduct in the case several years ago.

"I want to know why it would not be a conflict of interest for you to have inside information on all school board matters, including closed-door meetings. And then be in a position to tell your live-in boyfriend, Roger Merry, all of that information," Barbara Cullen wrote in a September 2015 email. "This seems wrong. Can you inform me as to why this is OK with your ethics?"

At the time, Myers defended herself by insisting she would have to "have substantial financial benefit in order for it to be a conflict of interest," citing the district's attorney and the Wisconsin Association of School Boards. Myers forwarded the email exchange to Merry.

"I will not profit by this at all. Roger and I are not married," she wrote back to Cullen. "We do not have a shared bank account."

Cullen responded by calling her a woman "lacking integrity."

While she might not have benefited directly from helping to push the settlement through by sharing the confidential information, it would benefit her campaign manager. This is still against every ethics code ever written. Why she has not been brought up on charges yet is beyond me.

It also should give one pause to wonder what she would do if she were elected to Congress. If they passed a bill or policy that she disagreed with, or if she wanted to benefit herself or someone close to her, would she again think she is above the law and do whatever she felt like, despite however unethical or illegal it might be? That strong possibility alone should make any rationally thinking person reconsider any support for her, either in this race or any future races.

Clearly, Myers is not fit for any office, including the one she holds now.

Milwaukee Dems Asked To Expel Chris Abele

The gentle reader is already aware that Chris Abele had been on a yearlong mission to rob county retirees of their pensions.  Fortunately, the county board was able to stop him before he created a bigger - and absolutely avoidable - problem for the county and the taxpayers.  Earlier this month, Abele vetoed the board's repair job but they were able to override his recklessness.

However, Abele is not going to be able to just walk away without taking some responsibility for his actions, which he is used to doing due to his father's wealth.

Dennis Hughes, who just restored justice and democracy to Janesville and their school board, has once again stood up to hold Abele accountable for his deplorable attack and maltreatment of these retirees.  Hughes has sent the following letter to the executive board of the Democratic Party of Milwaukee County, asking them to expel Abele from the Party for going so against one of the most basic tenets of the party:

Chris Abele Expulsion

It will be interesting to see how the Milwaukee Democrats handle this. It seems that Hughes' request will get little serious consideration. The chair, Marlene Ott, is known to be such an Abele fanatic that she suspends disbelief and ignores reality to support whatever he does, including this attack on the retirees.

Adding to the muddle is that other officers have conflicts of interest, including Secretary Brandon Savage, who has been on Abele's payroll.

Nor can the county party look to the state party for help.  Mike Tate, the soon but not soon enough to be gone chair of the state party, is personal friends with Abele and even has called him a leader and honored him despite Abele's antics.

It's not like the Democrats don't already have enough grounds to take action.

Along with the attack on retirees, there has been Abele's repeated attempts to utterly bust the unions, there has been his decimation of representative government and subsequent loss of democracy and the simple fact that he has donated to the likes of rabid Tea Party Republicans like Dale Kooyenga and Joe Sanfelippo.

Hopefully, the board will be responsible enough to take action now before Abele undermines the party even further and sends them further into chaos.

AFSCME, Democracy Again Triumphant In Janesville

A few weeks ago, I reported about the heroic efforts of Dennis Hughes, a staff representative for AFSCME District 40, who, in the course of his duties, found irregularities in the nomination papers for two candidates for the Janesville School Board.

Hughes challenged those nomination papers and they were found to be legally insufficient, taking those candidates off the ballot.  Unfortunately, the authorities mistakenly found Hughes' complaints to be insufficient because he was not a resident of Janesville.  This was the result of a misinterpretation of election laws.

The two candidates appealed their disqualifications to the Government Accountability Board, who not only upheld their disqualifications but overruled the finding regarding Hughes' complaints.  The GAB also found fault with the way the school board clerk handled the entire matter:

The state Government Accountability Board has denied ballot appeals by would-be Janesville School Board candidates David DiStefano and Diane Eyers.

The decision announced Friday means the two will not appear on the April 7 ballot.

[...]

School board clerk Karl Dommershausen and assistant board clerk Debra Blazer ruled Jan. 13 that the candidates should be removed from the ballot.

The Government Accountability Board ruled Dommershausen and Blazer erred by “incorrectly informing candidates … that their names would be included in the drawing by lot for placement on the 2015 Spring Election ballot prior to the nomination paper challenge deadline expiring.”

The Government Accountability Board also ruled the clerks “incorrectly rejected the challenges brought by Mr. (Dennis) Hughes based solely on the fact that he was not an elector for the School District of Janesville and therefore did not meet the definition of complainant.”

The clerks ultimately arrived at the correct decision to remove the candidates, according to the Government Accountability Board ruling.

But the story is not done there.

There is also the issue of the improper behaviors by district officials including the clerk and Superintendent Karen Schulte, who tried to interfere with democracy and with Hughes' rights as a union representative.

This could get even more interesting.

I do want to comment Dennis Hughes for his diligence and persistence in seeing that democracy is upheld. It is an fine example of why we all must stay involved in the democratic process, regardless of what level of government is involved.

AFSCME And The Janesville School Board

When Scott Walker dropped his bomb - Act 10 - on the unsuspecting people of Wisconsin, many
people figured that the public sector unions, especially AFSCME, were busted and done for.

They couldn't be more wrong.

Oh, there is no denying that Act 10, which is nothing more than the misnamed "Right to Work" legislation for public sector workers, had hurt the unions. But the unions are using this opportunity to learn how to fight smarter and harder.  But AFSCME is a long way from being busted.

There are a few people in Janesville that can vouch to this, however unwillingly.

The Janesville School Board has nine members, five of which are conservative and supporters of the corporate agenda for education in our state.  The board was poised to implement a number of draconian acts on the employees of the school district - both the teachers and the support staff.

As part of his duties, Dennis Hughes, staff representative with AFSCME District Council 40, was making routine inquiries into signature counts for the spring elections. When he learned that two candidates for the Janesville School  Board - David DiStefano and Diane Eyers - had only two or three signatures over the minimum, he went to follow up to make sure that the the nomination papers were legally sufficient.

What happened next quickly escalated into a bizarre and troubling series of events.  With his expressed permission, I am repeating Hughes' own words to describe what happened when he went to examine the nomination papers:

Dennis Hughes

On Friday, January 8, I arrived at the Janesville Education Services Center to examine
signatures for the April 7th School Board election. The Asst. School Board Clerk, Debra Blazer, was not available on Wednesday, January 6, or Thursday, January 7, so I only had one day to examine signatures and file a complaint before the Friday deadline.

Debra Blazer immediately gave me all candidates’ nomination papers, a map of the district, and space to examine signatures in the School Board conference room. I immediately noticed that candidate Diane Eyers did not have both a signature and printed name for her electors. I notified Debra Blazer and she stated that she needed to tell Dr. Karen Schulte, the Superintendent of the School District of Janesville.

I moved on to examine David DiStefano’s signatures. After examining his signatures for nearly two hours, I told Debra Blazer that DiStefano had an incorrect heading on all but one of his nomination papers. In the heading’s office, district, and jurisdiction boxes; DiStefano had written “School Board”, checked the box for “Seat” and left the rest of the district box blank, and wrote only “Janesville” in the jurisdiction box. By not identifying the “School District of Janesville,” DiStefano created a likelihood of confusion for those that signed his sheets because there are two different school districts in Janesville.

After notifying her of the problem, Debra Blazer left to speak with Dr. Schulte. She came back into the School Board conference room fifteen minutes later and I told her there was another problem because both Eyers and DiStefano had failed to include page numbers, which were necessary for my challenge. Rather than add the numbers, she asked to take the papers and said she would need extra time because she was eating lunch. Thinking nothing of it, I said it was not a problem.

Twenty minutes later, Debra Blazer entered the School Board conference room and presented me with DiStefano’s nomination papers. She pointed to the district field in the header and said, “isn’t this number enough to identify the district?” After examining the forms for nearly two hours, I can say with certainty that there were no numbers previously written in the district field, yet the forms now included the number “2695,” which is the District’s official district number. I immediately asked who wrote that number and Debra Blazer did not answer. I followed her back to her office, and she finally admitted that she had witnessed DiStefano fill in the headings of his nomination papers before submitting his collected signatures. Though she did not resolve the situation of fraudulently falsifying the nomination papers, I was satisfied because the information she provided was enough to remove the candidate from the ballot. I immediately asked her to sign an affidavit stating what she witnessed and she agreed to do so.

I left Debra Blazer’s office to return to the School Board conference room to finish my complaints and, fifteen minutes later, Dr. Karen Schulte entered the conference room followed by Dr. Steve Sperry, the Human Resources Director. Dr. Schulte asked what I was doing there and why I was wasting the time of “her clerk.” I said I would have been there Wednesday or Thursday, but the election clerk was unavailable, so I was forced to monopolize her time due to the election time constraints. She asked what I needed. I stated I only needed to print out, sign, and notarize my complaints. She asked what else I needed and I stated that Debra Blazer had agreed to sign an affidavit explaining the improper conduct she witnessed when DiStefano was submitting his nomination papers. Dr. Schulte stated that Debra Blazer would not be signing the affidavit until Dr. Schulte was able to speak to legal counsel. I stated that it was none of the District’s business, that there were no legal issues, and that the deadline was quickly approaching.

Dr. Schulte forced me to leave the conference room and would not let me get my complaints notarized by Debra Blazer. Therefore, I left the Education Services Center to print my documents. For the DiStefano complaint, I printed a version that stated Debra Blazer’s affidavit was enclosed and another version explaining that Dr. Schulte had blocked Debra Blazer from signing an affidavit. I went back to the Education Services Center and asked Dr. Schulte which version I should have notarized to give her one more chance to allow Debra Blazer to testify to what she witnessed. She did not change her mind. At the time, Dr. Schulte was in a meeting with Debra Blazer.

I left to get the documents notarized and returned to the Education Services Center an hour later, around 4pm. I went to Debra Blazer’s office to drop off my complaints and she was not there. I went to the front desk and the receptionist went directly to Dr. Schulte’s office. Dr. Schulte walked out of the office and asked to take the complaints. I refused to give them to her and requested to deliver them to Debra Blazer. Dr. Schulte escorted me to her office, where she was still meeting with Blazer, and I handed her the complaints. Debra Blazer looked to be in extreme distress. Dr. Schulte then stated that Debra Blazer had decided on her own not to sign the affidavit and I stated that a reasonable person would find that someone coerced her because she agreed to sign the affidavit and then decided not to do so ten minutes later after speaking to her boss. Especially considering the news was delivered by her boss. Debra Blazer never told me herself that she would not sign the documents.

Unfortunately, events became more bizarre after this.

The following Tuesday, Hughes went back to follow up on his complaints.

Dr. Karen Schulte

School district Clerk Karl Dommershausen and assistant board clerk Debra Blazer determined that Hughes' complaint was invalid since he did not live in the school district. This finding is in error, since state law says that the papers in any race can be challenged by an elector. The elector can live anywhere in Wisconsin. They mistakenly believed that it had to be an elector from that district.

Despite their incorrect finding that Hughes' complaint was invalid, they also determined that the nomination papers for DiStefano and Eyers were legally insufficient and their names were struck from the ballot. Both candidates have the right to appeal this decision to the Government Accountability Board (GAB). Both candidates also have the right to run as write in candidates.

The complete findings and evidence can be seen here.

But as I said, it gets even more bizarre.

While Hughes was waiting for the results of  his complaints, he was in the lobby area, reading a book.  Apparently, someone reading in the school district's main office was enough to put Dr. Schulte in a panic. She called the police and had not only removed from the building but had him temporarily banned from the building.  The ban has since been lifted.

Complaints have been filed with GAB regarding Dr. Schulte's interference with the election process and the concern that some of the nomination papers have been falsified.

As mentioned above, the Janesville School Board had a 5-4 majority of conservative members.  Because AFSCME provided due and diligent service to make sure things were legal, there is a chance for the majority to be pro-education, helping to protect all the workers in the school district, whether they are members of AFSCME or not.

Is it any wonder why that the dark money special interests are pouring money into trying to destroy unions?  Without the unions, they would be able to run rampant in their attacks on workers and trying to profiteer off of public services, such as education.