Letter to the Editor

Wisconsin crime victims recently got a huge victory thanks to our area legislators: Senator Andre Jacque and Representative Joel Kitchens. In May, the Wisconsin Senate and Assembly voted overwhelmingly in support of a bipartisan victims’ rights Constitutional Amendment known as Marsy’s Law for Wisconsin.  The Amendment will now be before Wisconsin voters through a statewide ballot in April of next year.


As a violent crime survivor, I know how important victims’ rights are throughout the difficult legal process. After I became the victim of physical assault, I was often too paralyzed by fear to even leave my home, afraid that my attacker could find me, and this time, I might not make it out. I felt totally abandoned by the judicial system.


I’d like to express my sincere thanks to Senator Jacque and Representative Kitchens for supporting and co-sponsoring Marsy’s Law. I was proud to be one of the survivors who testified in favor of this important legislation. My story, and those of so many other survivors, clearly demonstrated the need to strengthen victims’ rights. I’m grateful to lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for moving Wisconsin closer to making equal rights for crime victims a reality.


Now, it’s time for Wisconsin’s voters to have the final say on Marsy’s Law for Wisconsin. I look forward to voting to support equal rights for crime victims in April, and helping to prevent future victims from suffering the way that I did. I urge my fellow community members to do the same.

Your Right to Know -- Bill would block scrutiny of lottery winners 

When University of Wisconsin-Madison student journalist Peter Coutu investigated frequent lottery winners in Wisconsin in 2018, he uncovered a pattern: the owners and clerks of stores that sell lottery tickets seemed to have more luck than normal. 

In his article for Wisconsin Watch, Coutu consulted a statistical expert, who concluded that the lucky streaks among some of the frequent winners of the Wisconsin Lottery defied any reasonable explanation. 

In all, Coutu found that three of the top 13 frequent winners had close ties to the retailers selling them the winning tickets. Another expert noted in the article that retailers get a cut of the winnings, providing additional temptation to cheat.

When Coutu joined the Virginian-Pilot newspaper in Norfolk, Virginia, later in 2018, he conducted a similar investigation. He found that many of the frequent winners in that state also were lottery retailers. One, the owner of a Newport News store, had cashed in 140 lottery tickets worth more than $400,000, including 23 tickets purchased at his own store.

The findings prompted policy changes in the Virginia Lottery, including scrutiny of frequent lottery winners — which Wisconsin already does — and a requirement that winners disclose any ties to lottery retailers. It also sparked criminal investigations into some potentially fraudulent winnings. 

But such independent examination of suspicious lottery activity would no longer be possible in Wisconsin under the recently introduced Lottery Privacy Act. AB 213, sponsored by Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, and Rep. Gary Tauchen, R-Bonduel, would allow winners to shield their names from the public. 

In announcing the bill, Tauchen said he was responding to concerns that jackpot winners could be targeted for fraud, abuse and harassment. “Just because you win the lottery,” Vos said, “it shouldn’t mean you lose your right to privacy.”

Virginia recently passed a bill to shield the names of some lottery winners — but only those who claimed a ticket worth $10 million or more. In 2017, Texas allowed lottery winners of $1 million or more to conceal their identity. Delaware, Ohio and South Carolina all let anyone who wins  remain anonymous. But in New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie vetoed a similar measure, saying it would “undermine the transparency that provides taxpayers confidence in the integrity of the Lottery.”

To be sure, privacy issues are important — but so is public integrity. And the Wisconsin Lottery is big business. 

Since it launched in 1988, the lottery has generated $4.3 billion in property tax relief. Players have won $8.2 billion in prizes. And retailers have gotten $920 million in bonuses for selling winning tickets. 

Customers buy tickets with the assumption that their odds of winning are the same as anyone else’s. Politicians should not be chipping away at that trust. 

Lottery spokeswoman Patty Mayers told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in April that the agency favors the current policy, which “protects the integrity of the lottery” and is “rooted in a tradition of transparency.”

That is the right approach. Shielding the names of winners would make it hard for the public and the media to figure out whether the lottery is on the up-and-up — or whether we are being bamboozled.


Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Dee J. Hall is the council’s secretary and managing editor of Wisconsin Watch. 


Thankfully, Sturgeon Bay’s common council at their May 21, 2019 regular meeting resolved their unconstitutional, alder Dan Williams’ committee led recommendation to restrict public participation, and understood after listening to actual public comment, that the “public,” under “public comment,” means anyone, and that discrimination on the basis of residency is not allowed under state statute.  

I’m not certain that Mr Williams’ previous committee meeting dictates restricting public comments to speaking only to non-agenda items was finally eliminated for all city meetings.  Clear favoritism in violation of the newly enacted rules of conduct and ethics was granted to two individuals who had gained agenda access (about pedal carts) to promote their own possible financial gain while potential debate in opposition had been clearly denied by the committee chairperson Williams.

To VanLieshout and Ward’s May 17, memorandum, if I understood the entire dialog, mayor Ward claimed he had assigned the task of political lobbying of state government (i.e., the governor, the WI DNR and two state legislators) to make changes to the state constitution regarding the public trust doctrine to Mr VanLieshout (who appears to have willingly and fully complied with the mayor’s order).  In essence, such a clear political lobbying effort should have been initially and completely rejected by the city administrator outright, and obviously was not.  How much city staff time was wasted there?

Sturgeon Bay city voters witnessed their five newly elected officials vote to violate of their oaths of office to protect and defend the state constitution.  Fortunately only four alders fell for the mayor’s blatant political gamesmanship set before their tiny car windshield.  Equally entertaining were the repeated insinuations from these “center ring, big top players,” that the January 3, 2019 administrative WI DNR rulings on the west waterfront were establishing new legal precedent.   Public trust OHWM precedent was set by Congress when Wisconsin was part of a US territory.

Alderpersons Hayes and Avenson were fully on the correct path with their request to attempt defining the OHWM for all property parcels within the combined TID #2/#4.  The fact that city taxpayers are on the hook for snow plowing, landscaping, utilities and maintenance of two city parking lots titled to the WRA, should prompt a resolution from the council that the WRA membership fund those maintenance costs out of their own pockets or relinquish title to the city for one dollar.  This is an obvious solution to further unwrapping and eliminating special interests clearly holding the city taxpayers hostage and currently preventing any and all future progress on the west waterfront.



Letter to the Editor: It's Only an Opinion

The Sturgeon Bay common council fortunately took the first step toward formally enacting a Code of Ethics and a Code of Conduct last night and just in time as there appears to be a first opportunity to exercise parts of the new code immediately upon its final approval in two weeks.
Council members Gary Nault and Dan Williams introduced the May 7, 2019, closed session agenda item topic, requesting reconsideration of the city attempting to join in the current Wiese/Wulf et. al.,  appeal of the January 3, 2019 WI DNR ordinary high water mark decision for city lot 92, being heard by Judge Gregory B Gill on May 9, tomorrow as I write this.
What cannot be dismissed as a mere oversight without a full investigation as a potential violation of ethics and conduct was an obvious and blatant failure to include any of the WI Department of Justice defenses of the WI DNR January 3, 2019 OHWM decision in the council’s information packet published on the city website, Friday May 3.
It appears as no real wonder that Mr Nault would want to place restrictions on the public commenting during city meetings when a member of the public last night, pointed out that either the two councilmen, the mayor (supposedly in charge of the agenda) or city staff failed to present all the easily and readily available information on the legal appeal topic, to have engendered an honest and fully informed council engage in the closed session topic discussion.
In other words was initially presenting only one side of this current legal appeal to the council in their information packet a deliberate action, potentially in order to serve the private financial concerns of five Sturgeon Bay citizens claiming to have legal standing to appeal of the WI DNR decision?  Mayor Ward commented to the first public speaker that the WI DOJ response of May 2, 2019, was “only an opinion.”
Along with the May 2, WI DOJ response to the Wiese/Wulf appeal of the WI DNR decision was their 17 page DOJ response of April 19, 2019, and a third party respondent’s brief supporting the WI DNR Jan 3, 2019, OHWM decision.  No common council can make an unbiased and informed decision with only half the legal picture initially presented to them for their consideration.  Last night’s concerned citizens speaking up before the council undoubtedly beg for generous expansion of public comments, not further restrictions. 

Your Right to Know -- Body cam bill balances privacy, openness

When so much about politics is partisan, one might expect a topic like police body cameras to be contentious, particularly as it relates to public access to recordings.
But proposed legislation to regulate the use of these cameras was approved by nine of the 10 members of the committee that produced it, and received unanimous support from the bipartisan Joint Legislative Council. The bill is now working its way through the Legislature.
Last year, another proposed bill to set rules for police body cameras drew concerns from open records advocates and others. Among other things, it would have required anyone who appeared in a body camera recording taken in certain locations to approve of the video’s release to the public. That would create new work for law enforcement and maybe keep too much information out of public view.
The bill was approved by the Assembly, but stalled in the Senate after it became clear that more work needed to be done. A Legislative Study Committee was formed and met four times between July and November of last year. Sen. Patrick Testin (R-Stevens Point) and Rep. Chris Taylor (D-Madison), who supported competing bills on police body cameras in the previous session served as chair and vice chair, respectively. Committee members included law enforcement, representatives of the media, lawyers, and other lawmakers.
The resulting bill, SB-50, addresses such aspects of police body camera policy as training, equipment, and records retention. Much of the discussion in drafting the proposal focused on public access to recordings.
Wisconsin has a long-standing standard of presuming that all public records are available for the public to view. The committee built on this standard in drafting the proposed legislation, as well as on the experience of other states that have dealt with this issue.
To address the privacy concerns, the committee proposed adjustments to the balancing test as it applies to police body cameras. Records custodians must weigh the privacy interests of victims, minors, and witnesses in deciding whether a video should be released. Redaction technology can be used to protect victims, minors and those with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The study committee worked hard to reach this agreement. Committee members listened sincerely to those who disagreed with them. Sen. Testin and Rep. Taylor deserve credit for their work leading this committee.
If SB-50 becomes law as currently written, law enforcement agencies will have new rules to help them navigate the use of this new technology. Victims and minors would know that their privacy has protections. The public and the media would continue to have access to police body camera recordings, and they would have the same remedies for appealing a record custodian’s decision as they have today.
SB-50 has not yet been scheduled for a public hearing and lawmakers could make changes to the bill before it comes up for a vote, but the bipartisan support for the bill up to this point is a promising sign.

Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Kyle Geissler is director of operations and public affairs at Wisconsin Broadcasters Association.

Civil Discourse, an occasional attempt to restore civility to our civic discourse - David Ward: Most qualified mayor in Sturgeon Bay history

David Ward: Most qualified mayor in Sturgeon Bay history


Civil Discourse, an occasional attempt to restore civility to our civic discourse, by Roger Utnehmer, DoorCountyDailyNews.com President and CEO


David Ward is the most qualified mayor to be elected in the history of Sturgeon Bay. He brings to the challenges he will face a Ph.D. in Finance and significant administrative and economic development experience in both the public and private sectors.


His resume qualifies him for an annual salary in the private sector of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yet, he spent most of his career in public service. Major cities throughout the United States would be proud to have a mayor with David Ward’s resume.


Ward served as the Chief Academic Officer for the 26-campus University of Wisconsin system. He was the interim chancellor at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay. Before that he was a university professor. He operated his own economic development consulting company for nearly twenty years. His experience includes overseeing budgets ranging from $80 million a year to $6 billion. And he’s also been involved in the local community, serving on the Door County Medical Center board, a leader in his church, city council member and more.


This background assures that David Ward brings to the office of mayor the skill, talent and temperament to solve city problems, to govern with the consent of the governed and to unite a community that occasionally appears to be congenitally addicted to conflict.


It’s time to give this exceptionally qualified public servant what he needs to be successful. That includes respect in disagreement, open communications with civility and recognition of his right to privacy without rude intrusions into time with family. 


The family of any public official also deserves the appreciation of the public.

More than one mayor of Sturgeon Bay has had their privacy and that of their families invaded over a Friday night fish fry with family. Let’s show David Ward and his family the respect they deserve.


May those who disagree with David Ward on the issues he will face show that in Sturgeon Bay there is civility in our civic discourse.


That’s my opinion. I’d like to hear yours.


Civility automatically returned to Sturgeon Bay city government when Thad Birmingham surrendered the reins of power to Mayor David Ward at 3:00 PM April 12, 2019.  Admittedly not ashamed in the least to refresh peoples’ memories, I stood up to interrupt the previous mayor during public comment on International Women’s Day in March of 2017, as a single father of a special needs daughter, while witnessing first hand a loud and abusive tirade being foisted upon a female city resident by the common council chairperson,  falsely refuting and screaming his denial at her, over her correct, accurate, polite and factual assertion that the city was attempting to illegally sell public land to a prospective hotel developer, while disregarding the public trust doctrine of the state constitution.
This same young woman and mother was being threatened around that time period, with a SLAPP suit for telling the truth about then city governance and the WRA closed session machinations, disregarding any pretense to oaths of office or protecting and defending the state constitution.  The acronym SLAPP abbreviates the phrase, Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.  Essentially “shut up or we’ll come after you, big time,” psychological abuse to retain unquestioned power and control.
As a sincere and polite challenge to you, Mayor Ward, kindly explain or clearly define one example of the incivility that you inferred exists, campaigned against and for which you intend to fix.  You’ve got the exclusive floor for three years with most of the local media. Essentially where is or what specifically was the problem?  Constituent city residents fail all litmus tests for exhibiting incivility.  I’m seeing nothing but a perpetrated myth from your campaigning and possibly an intentional clear diversion from problems such as financial realities.  A successful divide and conquer theme on your part.
Regardless, here’s wishing you the best to correct the numerous financial investment mistakes for which you are now charged with oversight, such as an $850K construction loan plus interest for city taxpayers to pay for  out of their own pockets directly to the Bay Lofts LLC.  This debt was committed to by common councils  “serving,” prior to April 17, 2018.  Any specific plans for a taxpayer ROI (Return on Investment) report there?
Hearing specific plans for your professional economic insights into taxpayer return on their forced investment appeared nowhere in your campaigning, but, I agree whole-heartedly that you are likely the best choice, the person immediately available locally, possessing the knowledge and expertise to explain and possibly correct and steer to an enlightened and fairly attained, taxpayer funded equitable ROI for all of Sturgeon Bay’s residents.  With eyes and ears to learn from you and no clear plans from you about how you intend to fulfill your campaign promises, the public, including myself, are eager to learn from the self-professed master of  economics and civility?


As Sturgeon Bay is about to welcome a newly elected group of supervisors and a new mayor, this faction of professed fiscal and civility reformers will be presented with pressing unfinished city business needing immediate attention.  Legal “house-keeping,” chores on the west waterfront, such as ordering the city administrator to finally submit the requisite applications for submerged land leases from the Board of Commissioners of Public Lands is the top priority.  A proposed “lighthouse tower” and a common council approved, state historic designated landmark both await action.
Equally required for both the Teweles and Brandeis restoration and for the improperly land titled, Door County Maritime Museum (DCMM), city voters should be reassured that David Ward as mayor will apply the same strict standards of legal accountability and donor proven adequate future maintenance endowment funding guarantees, surrealistic performance bonding and other assurances from the DCMM that he is demanding of the Sturgeon Bay Historical Society (SBHS) for the grain elevator project, both of which  will eventually be sited on state owned filled lakebed, publicly entrusted to city oversight.  
Unfortunately, confusion exists and currently neither new tax incremental commercial development nor two notable public interest non-profit projects can easily proceed because of the outgoing mayor’s inexcusable failure to have secured the required, non-contested WI DNR issued OHWM demarcations, and the subsequent submerged lakebed land leases for portions of the west waterfront.  
In late March, the DCMM Deputy Director claimed the DCMM was working with the city to secure the required submerged land leases.  An open record request of the city shows no such endeavors occurred within the last 15 months beyond a single email exchange between the city and the DCMM.  A subsequent email reply from the Green Bay office of the WI DNR stated that neither the city nor the DCMM has made the necessary applications for needed submerged land leases.
Not wishing to doubt anyone’s statement made on local radio, have unrecorded and clandestine talks occurred between the city and personally self-interested parties seeking to “resolve,” city public land issues?  Further throwing confusion on this matter is a former WRA member and current DCMM Board of Directors member being one of 22 people, party to an appeal of the Jan 3, 2019, DNR OHWM designation, the granary lot, which seems truly counterproductive to time sensitive adjacent DCMM project goals.
In the public interest, wouldn’t a clarifying public statement from the DCMM, the city administrator and the outgoing mayor need to be heard?  Perhaps the public should be calling on the County DA or the WI DOJ for answers?  Disinformation from David Ward’s campaign blaming likely future hold-ups to ALL progress on the west waterfront on the SBHS, these predictions are definitively NOT attributable to the SBHS or their historic landmark preservation efforts.  Mayor-elect Ward and the newly elected supervisors will surely be demanding to publicly get to the bottom of this situation, their immediate promised fiduciary responsibly to the voters who elected them.

Laurel Hauser Letter to the Editor

The City of Sturgeon Bay’s new council will do a good job. Coming up three votes short and having been part of a council that created a sea change in some very entrenched city politics, I’m in a unique position to say this. The new council will do a good job. They’ll get a lot right. They’ll make some mistakes, and they’ll, for sure, be misunderstood at times. The job is more difficult and more nuanced than people think.


I am sorry that a lot of misinformation made the rounds in the past couple of months. Complex issues don’t translate well to postcards or ads, and the issues the last council dealt with were very complex. I’m very, very proud of the many things we accomplished.


With little time to digest the election results, I will say that my initial thought is that big and fast pendulum swings are exhausting, and they are the direct result of uncreative leadership.

As we negotiate some of the challenges and the exciting opportunities in our future (and there are a lot of them), I hope we all resist the urge to be flame-fanners. Every society needs a few fanners – so the fire doesn’t go out completely – but it needs far more fire tenders. If you’re a citizen and the only way and time you’re involved is incendiary, you’re not helping. If you’re an elected official and your only answer is “no,” you’re not doing enough.


Going forward, we will need good administration and creative vision. We need both to be outstanding. These virtues rely on good communication. I already see some change happening. When I was elected in 2017, there was little to no discussion between ousted and elected candidates. My opponent in 2019 and I have already exchanged very pleasant notes and are making plans to get together for coffee. That’s a good thing.


Please, no one give up on Sturgeon Bay and, please, don’t dig the trenches deeper. There are more than two sides. We have a community full of talent and passion. I can’t wait to see what Sturgeon Bay looks like ten years from now. I think it’s going to be awesome. (And I don’t use that as a throw-away word.)


Thank you to all who have gotten involved. Please stay involved. As for my own race, we’ll see what evolves in the coming days. I may owe it to the democratic process to have a 3-vote margin recounted. I’ll talk with our city clerk and will try to make a wise decision on that. I’m heartened that I received more votes in yesterday’s election (245) than I received in 2017 (230), and sincerely thank everyone who supported me.


Laurel Hauser

Letter to the Editor: Response to a recent political advertisement

This is in response to the full page advertisement in the March 22 Peninsula Pulse paid for and authorized by candidates Helen Bacon, Dan Williams, Gary Nault, and Kisten McFarlin-Reeths. If we are to believe the claims and the numbers presented in the ad, these four candidates (the “Fiscal Four”?) are all that stand between the citizens of Sturgeon Bay and financial ruin. They conveniently ignore recent history in their assertion that the current city council “has not demonstrated fiscal responsibility regarding the Westside waterfront” because...well, that’s where the facts get a little fuzzy. They apparently take umbrage with the results of the last council election that swept in some common sense reformers who put the brakes on the reckless and ethically compromised shenanigans of the previous council that served as a rubber stamp for every whim and whisper of Mayor Thad Birmingham. That reliable working majority voted to sell waterfront property of questionable title to developer Bob Papke, a decision that prompted the law suit that ultimately led to a DNR ruling confirming a water mark in accordance to the Wisconsin state constitution.


The half million dollars wasted on legal fees and a settlement with the developer can be placed squarely at the feet of councilmen who represented districts 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 before they retired or were voted out, not the current council members. What’s more, the TID created for the west waterfront redevelopment was the brainchild of that previous council majority, too—despite the fact that Sturgeon Bay government’s luck with TIDs has been pretty lousy, considering that only TID #1 (the industrial park) isn’t drowning in red ink. To read the ad, you might get the idea that the Friends of Sturgeon Bay Waterfront (the group that WON the lawsuit against the city to protect the public trust without financial reward) and the Sturgeon Bay Historical Society are the evil cabal responsible for the TID fever that has put the city in financial peril.


The factually-challenged four also sound clarions of alarm concerning the donation of a renovated and restored granary on the west side, which might serve as both landmark and centerpiece to public space on the waterfront. For some reason, the gift of more than a million dollars has them clutching their pearls because the granary won’t include “restrooms, water, and kitchen facilities for events,” nor will it offer “heating, cooling, ventilation or handicap accessibility.” I’m surprised they didn’t add helipad, an elevator, and large screen TVs to their list of things that no other park facility offers the public. If you’re going to complain, folks, complain BIG!


Having read this ridiculous ad, I am more convinced than ever that the future of Sturgeon Bay rests not with backward thinking people like these but with those who are opposing them. Vote April 2 not out of fear and resentment but with hope and conviction.


Being an informed and concerned Sturgeon Bay resident who pays attention to city business, I am witnessing numerous changes, positive progress toward a greater common good through city policy and a healthier attitude toward her citizens.  This long overdue effect distinctly began with the election of our current common council last April. The public interest, enlightened, responsibility focused majority four female voiced votes, accompanied by Councilman David Hayes, has directed our city policy to begin operating once again, in a direction which holds out clear promise and hope for a brighter future the whole city. 

To further that positive direction we need to elect a new mayor who is willing to support the progress that has been recently cultivated.  We need someone who hasn’t already indicated a preference to follow the old rules of economic development, that tiresome focus on large projects aimed at economic benefits for only a small minority of owners, funded on the backs of the rest of the city residents.  We must elect a new mayor who won’t be strapping our children, our present working class or those of limited means on fixed incomes with crippling financial city debt that produces no short term benefits for most of us.

Shawn Fairchild understands incremental development, historic value and good stewardship of our land and financial resources, demonstrates a proven commitment to the well-being of his and all our neighbors, and his belief that we bear an obligation to ourselves and those future generations, by avoiding actions which substantially benefit only a select few.

While attending the recent mayoral forum and hearing each of the candidates, it became obvious that Shawn Fairchild’s positive vision for Sturgeon Bay is honest, creative and an effective path to bringing jobs to our community. He knows how to think on his feet, and to express his thoughts clearly, with answers and opinions that have substance. Shawn Fairchild is the candidate who should serve as our next mayor.

Please join me in casting your vote April 2nd for SHAWN FAIRCHILD – MAYOR of Sturgeon Bay.

Chesla Seely-Anschutz 
Sturgeon Bay, WI


Unfortunately, the real issue of a large overall city debt accumulated through several decades of Waterfront Redevelopment Authority, mayoral and former common council mismanagement, which the current common council has successfully begun to correct, is being ignored with the false flag distraction being hyped with the grain elevator and the Sturgeon Bay Historical Society.  TID financing failure is the real problem and not the granary, or the private gift of over a million dollars.


The granary is being used to distract from, using one example, city taxpayers subsidizing the Bay Lofts LLC construction loan, as stated in the TID development agreement with the city, to the tune of over a million dollars.  Yes, over a million dollars of your money is directly paying for a private developer’s construction loan. 

Even when the Bay Lofts LLC fell short of their contractual obligation to deliver a minimum of $5M in assessed property valuation, David Ward as city Finance chair argued to give Bay Lofts a free pass after not meeting their contractual terms.  The city could have demanded $160K over that contractual breach, but David Ward argued against that.


Mr Ward’s supporters are saying what a good listener he will be, but Mr Ward’s own published comments state he wants to limit participation from non-city residents at common council meetings.  Does he envision that hundreds of people shopping or regularly doing business in the city might not have something to say about issues like the attempted illegal transfer of public land to a hotel developer or the PRAT tax?


Mr Ward’s 2005 economic plan for the DCEDC has defined economic “stakeholders.”  Nowhere are blue collar workers, teachers, health care workers or government employees ever included as stakeholders in economic development planning.  Workers apparently don’t count except as profit centers for big business.  Living wages are not mentioned as part of local economic planning.


CEOs, white collar managers, corporate boards, and theoretical elitist academia would appear to be the crowd that Mr Ward is most familiar with, by his own reckoning and mayoral self-promotion.  While Mr Ward emphasizes his credentials and a lengthy list of professional organizational memberships, how many of those numerous connections could just as easily be distractions, detriments or conflicts or are even needed to be a successful city mayor?   Who likely has Mr Ward’s ear?


Please consider electing Shawn Fairchild as your mayor.  He has a proven public interest track record, and indisputably understands normal working class people, smaller business owners and city economic issues.  He’s been there and lives there.  Regular people first are what define Shawn’s attitude and intentions for the city.  Putting the public good before corporate welfare demands your vote.


Letter to the Editor: Vote David Ward for Mayor

I urge the citizens of Sturgeon Bay to vote for David Ward for mayor. His educational, business, and administrative experience make him most qualified to run this city. Having lived here for 18 years he knows how to get things done and effect changes, if needed. Most important, Dave LISTENS. As a City Council member he often disagreed with the Council’s actions, but he always heard their reasons. Likewise, he will always listen to and welcome your ideas, comments, and suggestions.

I also urge my neighbors on the East side in District 3, to vote for a 30-year resident, Dan Williams for Alderman. His experience in emergency management will be very useful to the Council. He will help Dave Ward achieve his vision for a better Sturgeon Bay.


Thank you. 


G. Howard Phipps

Sturgeon Bay, WI

Letter to the Editor: Shawn Fairchild for Mayor

Shawn Fairchild for Mayor

For twenty-five years, I’ve had the privilege of knowing Shawn Fairchild.  As a carpenter supervisor for Palmer Johnson, he successfully worked with excellent carpenters, many of whom had strong and independent opinions.  As a Third Avenue business owner, he did a large, handsome remodel to accommodate his wonderful gallery, which would have been at home in Chicago or New York City.  Shawn has proved himself to be an intelligent, creative, resourceful entrepreneur.  Despite his many accomplishments, he has a modest demeanor and doesn’t oversell himself.  
When engaging with Shawn, he is welcoming and has a comfortable presence.  People instinctively like him and he relates well to people, including those with differing opinions.  Additionally, he’s an attentive, careful listener, who is respectful and is eager to hear your thoughts. 
Shawn is inherently positive in his approach to problems and to their solutions, and recognizes it is vital to be open minded and to hear all ideas before making decisions.  Rather than having the city’s problems defined and decided, he wants to be inclusive, to gather information from all potential sources and to be a consensus builder. In preparing himself for office, he’s had discussions with government officials, related community organizations and experts in various subjects.  
As a thirty-five year resident, who raised his two children in Sturgeon Bay, Shawn has a deep understanding of the city’s past and present economy and culture. We’re all aware the city has numerous challenges and, along with fast-growing tourism, is on the cusp of multiple changes. As someone who studied natural resource management and environmental studies, coupled with his attributes, dedication and enthusiasm, Shawn Fairchild would be the right leader for the residents of Sturgeon Bay, the city we all cherish.

Betty Parsons

Letter to the Editor--Support for Sturgeon Bay School Referendum

Dear Readers


I am writing this as an individual who at one time did not believe in voting for school referenda.  As a matter of fact, I may have been somewhat outspoken about it.  But that was B.K. (Before Kids).  A long time ago, a very wise person once told me, “You can be ready for marriage, but you’re NEVER ready for kids.”  What I’m saying is that my point of view has changed…..dramatically.  Kids will do that to you.


The experience that my two great kids (Matt & Jared) had coming up through the Sturgeon Bay School District was exceptional - not only academically, but also athletically and socially.  In fact, their experience prepared them well enough to get them into the school of their choice, UW-Madison.  It is a credit to the administration, the faculty and the staffs of all the schools they attended through their 12 years in the district.  If I had continued to not vote for the referenda that came about during my kids’ time in the District, and others had not as well, perhaps their experience would not have been as rewarding…thankfully, we’ll never know.


Now that my kids have moved on, it is my plan to vote for the referendum on April 2nd.  The way I look at it, there were people out there who, even though they didn’t have kids in the district, felt strongly enough about giving the kids of our community a quality education and voted in favor of the referenda that came before them.  I believe I  should “pay it forward” and give those kids coming up in the District the same opportunities that Matt and Jared had.




Dennis Van Bramer

Letter to the Editor: Shawn Fairchild will be a kind, thoughtful and wise Mayor

I have known Shawn for a few years – as an experienced and exceptional craftsman, as an effective and passionate advocate for the public good, and as a friend. These experiences allow me to understand the traits that will make a terrific mayor. He is a long-time community member who knows every corner of the city, has experienced decades of change, and has been an engaged and active citizen. In his interactions, he listens first, and he listens thoughtfully. When he then speaks, it is to connect the dots, to ensure information is understood by all, and to frame options. That is the approach I look forward to in our Sturgeon Bay mayor.


In running for office, he has deepened his research and his outreach. He told me that one of his early discussions was with the Door County Economic Development director, about the critical need for attainable housing, and possibilities and details of how that could be achieved over time. Shawn is open-minded and level-headed. He seeks information and input from those with knowledge on a particular subject. He values the expertise, talent and passion we have abundantly in the community and I know he will make good use of it.


Importantly, he believes in a city that will be proactive in seeking opportunities and in creatively searching for solutions, and he will establish an environment where that happens. He stands firmly for transparency in government. His arms are wide open to interesting ideas and thoughtful perspectives.


I look forward to progress that is inclusive and to the benefit of the whole community, for an exciting future in Sturgeon Bay! Please vote for Shawn Fairchild for Mayor, Tuesday  April 2nd. (Advance in-person voting 8 am - 4:30 pm weekdays at City Hall begins Monday March 18th – a good option, considering the possibility of a snowstorm on election day!).


Nancy Aten

Sturgeon Bay, WI

Letter to the Editor: Vote for Fairchild

This coming April 2 election is a pivotal one for the citizens of Sturgeon Bay. Two candidates will be competing for the mayoralty, in addition to several key city council races on the ballot. While it is tempting for some to dismiss those seeking public office as being “all alike” (shorthand for, What does it matter who wins?), the two candidates couldn’t be more different. One (Dr. David Ward) is the last remnant of the “old guard” who steered a course for the city through several dubious redevelopment deals that ended up costing city tax-payers hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and settlements with nothing to really show for the waste in money and man-hours. The other (Shawn Fairchild) is a tradesman and long-time resident who has emerged as a champion for the public trust that our previous city government was charged with protecting but, sadly, looked to subvert for the enrichment of a few powerful “insiders.”


Shawn Fairchild believes in inclusivity and collaboration, opening City Hall to the ideas and concerns of all citizens. That belief is bedrock to his campaign. He is concerned about issues that relate to the city’s future: affordable housing, attracting young families with good schools and employment opportunities, and fostering a business climate in which large industry and small businesses can both thrive. Dr. Ward, by virtue of his voting record as a member of the city council and the last supporter standing of Mayor Thad Birmingham’s administration, has shown himself to be comfortable with “exclusivity” and closed door deal-making. Sturgeon Bay and its many wonderful resources are, in this view, only worth protecting if they can be sold off to private interests for profit.


We have a chance in this coming election to choose a new path for city government, one that is open and responsive to ALL citizens, not just the well-heeled few; one that will protect those things about the city that we ALL value. I urge you to vote for Sturgeon Bay’s future. I urge you to vote for Shawn.

Endorsement for David Ward – Mayor of Sturgeon Bay

Over the past two years, I have had the pleasure of getting to know Dave Ward as both a business associate and friend.  During this time, I have observed several character traits in Dave that will undoubtedly serve him well as mayor of Sturgeon Bay.  Dave is financially astute, analytical in problem solving, caring, and perhaps most importantly, even-keeled.

Dave spent the majority of his career as a finance professor at UW-Green Bay and UW-Oshkosh, and moved on to become the Senior Vice President of Academic Affairs for the entire University of Wisconsin System.  He has a strong attention to detail, and is not afraid to ask the difficult questions that will result in the most efficient use of limited taxpayer revenue.

I have worked with Dave on strategic planning and corporate governance matters, and have seen first-hand how he looks at a challenge from all angles, ask questions, seeks input from differing points of view, and after taking all factors into account, develops the best path forward.  This structured analytical talent will allow Dave, in his position as mayor, to successfully pull the best ideas from differing viewpoints, with the end result being solutions that are best for the entire city and its stakeholders.

During his 18 years as a citizen of Sturgeon Bay, Dave has worked to make our community a better place to live.  He truly cares, as evidenced by his service on the board of directors of both Door County Memorial Hospital and the Door County Economic Development Corporation.  In addition, he has volunteered his time to other community organizations, including the Door County Triathlon, and the Sturgeon Bay United Methodist Church, to name a few.  Dave and his wife Judy are truly vested in Sturgeon Bay, and want to see it grow and thrive for future generations.   

Dave approaches situations in a very thoughtful, calm and even-keeled manner.  This is an extremely important character trait to have for the incoming mayor.  He keeps his emotions in check, and remains steady when situations become tense.  Sturgeon Bay needs a leader like Dave, someone whose only agenda is to do what is best for Sturgeon Bay, its residents, businesses and visitors alike.  

I was a resident of Sturgeon Bay for over 20 years, and now live just outside the city limits.  So while I cannot personally vote in the April 2nd mayoral election, I am proud to endorse Dave Ward for Mayor of Sturgeon Bay.

Peter J. Kerwin
3956 Peterson Road
Sturgeon Bay, WI 54235


The DC-LWV forum on Feb 28, absolutely helped me decide on three of the four city district races as to whom I’d recommend to the city voters to support on April 2.  I had initially involved myself in Sturgeon Bay city politics in defense of the Public Trust Doctrine of the Wisconsin State Constitution, essentially ignored by the former council majority including Fett, Vandertie, Ward, Wiesner and Mayor Birmingham and other local politicians. 


I whole-heartedly support Laurel Hauser in the 7th, District, to continue her non-partisan, proven efforts and the open government goals attained which she enumerated in her closing statement.  Her opponent, Ms McFarlin-Reeths, stated a clear personal agenda directly opposing the welcome progress Hauser has made fostering inclusivity and city policy decidedly pursued in the public interest.


Both Gary Nault in the 5th District, a Birmingham appointee to the Harbor Commission and Ms McFarlin-Reeths essentially vowed to be the same antagonist council members, announcing their pre-conceived agendas which clearly contradict their own claims to being open or able to  compromise. If either were elected, they’d immediately become the very same agents furthering the dissention which they both claimed their constituents and the city has had enough of already.


My clear preference in the 5th is the refreshingly open, thoughtfully tempered and clearly intelligent, Sarah K Evenson.   Both Nault and Reeths failed to state, either in their opposition to the huge public efforts to preserve the historically significant granary on public land, or in their promises to build commercial property tax value on the west waterfront, that the property below the current WI DNR declaratory ruled OHWM is closed to private commercial development, therefore appeared as hiding critical facts. 


The US Supreme Court on February 19, 2019 refused to hear a challenge in Gunderson v Indiana, from shore property home owners, arguments for closing all public access to vast Lake Michigan beaches, claiming that private land owners controlled property to the very water’s edge. 


That claim to private and exclusive shore access was squarely halted in a unanimous decision by the Indiana Supreme Court a year ago, and was just reaffirmed by the US Supreme Court, protecting all our Great Lakes.  (Please take note, Kitchens, David Ward, Wiese/Wulf et.al. v WI DNR)


In the City’s 1st District, both candidates offered clearly non-partisan and public interest priorities within  their comments, myself giving Ms Helen Bacon an edge in that she has a proven county board track record understanding the local problems resulting from real financial poverty, which we frequently pretend doesn’t exist locally, along with her extensive career and volunteer experience. 


In the City’s 3rd District, Williams has helped build Wisconsin’s current EMS delivery system, but I fear he’s too familiar with the extreme majority party partisan leadership in Madison.   Mr Sean Linnan’s popularity contest, mobile phone app consensus seeking scares me, recognizing any representative’s duty is to understand the issues and not capitulate to a particular vocal minority.  A toss-up, I don’t favor either candidate, here.

Vote David Ward for Mayor

I encourage Sturgeon Bay voters to elect David Ward as our next mayor on Tuesday, April 2. 
Mr. Ward brings a wealth of experience and financial expertise to the Common Council table. David has been a member of the City Council since July of 2016, serving as alderman for district 3. He has chaired both the Finance and Personnel Committees. Mr. Ward is also a Sturgeon Bay Utilities Commissioner. 
Furthermore, David Ward is a past board member and chair of the Door County Economic Development Corporation, focusing on three areas to boost the city’s economy: 1-improve our Internet services to better fulfill the demands of residents, businesses, and tourists, 2-maintain focus on the west side industrial park and shipyard to provide good paying jobs, and 3-support Sturgeon Bay’s position as a popular tourist destination. 
David Ward’s additional qualifications for serious consideration as Sturgeon Bay’s next mayor include: 9 years as board member and finance chair of the Door County Memorial Hospital, and chair of the Church Council at the United Methodist Church. 
Mr. Ward and his wife, Judy, have raised four children, having resided in Sturgeon Bay the past 18 years. His education credentials comprise a BBA, MBA, and PhD in Finance from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is both a former Finance Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, and UW-Oshkosh, as well as Administrator at central headquarters for the UW-System Administration. In addition, Mr. Ward is founder and president of NorthStar Analytic Consulting of Sturgeon Bay and Madison. 
David Ward’s priorities for Sturgeon Bay are simple, and yet comprehensive: better streets, affordable housing, attracting new retail, and maintaining and enhancing our city parks. 
As we move forward as a community, I truly believe that we need the vision and ability Mr. David Ward possesses. I strongly urge you to vote for David Ward for mayor, Tuesday, April 2, 2019. 

Mary Heil-Allen 
Sturgeon Bay, WI 

Civil Discourse: An Occasional Attempt to Restore Civility to Our Civic Discourse--Economic development starts with buying local

The Door County Economic Development Corporation, despite inappropriate side-taking in the past, is fortunate to be led by an accomplished professional executive director, Jim Schuessler.  His efforts to identify the pervasive shortage of affordable housing, recognizing its relationship to job creation, make Schuessler effective and respected.


That said, more local jobs can be created and retained if people bought what they could in Door County rather than on-line, out-of-town and from big box stores.  The problem that threatens more business today than any other is attracting employees.  Local business and industry could afford to pay more competitive wages if more local business was done here rather than on-line and out-of-town.


More children and grandchildren could find employment opportunities in Door County if more of their parents and grandparents did more of their shopping locally rather than on-line and out-of-town.  And more jobs could be created in Door County, not in light industry, tourism, shipbuilding and agriculture, but in retail businesses, if local residents did more business with friends and neighbors rather than on-line and out-of-town.  You cannot have local job growth when local residents fail to support local businesses.  


Statistics speak to the outflow of significant revenue that could be creating local jobs.  When 73 cents out of every dollar spent by Door County residents on clothing are spent outside of Door County that means fewer local jobs in the retail clothing economy.  When 70 cents out of every dollar spent by Door County residents on furniture are spent outside of Door County that means fewer local jobs in the retail furniture economy. 


Before you make a purchase at a big box store, on-line or out-of-town consider what that means to local employment opportunity.

Jim Schuessler and the DCEDC are working to bring more business to Door County.  Yet, you can create more jobs than the DCEDC will be able to do in years simply by focusing your purchases on where they can do the most good.  That’s right here by buying local in Door County.


Buying local does not only impact employment opportunity for people who need a job.  It also impacts the non-profit, civic and service organizations, churches and schools who depend on the generosity of locally-owned businesses.  Few Door County non-profits are funded by on-line retailers or out-of-town businesses and big box stores.


That’s my opinion.  I’d like to hear yours.


As Door/Kewaunee Legislative Days sponsors have gone public with their contrived and limiting survey, requesting issue ideas to bring to our state legislators, these pseudo inclusive efforts fail miserably in encouraging unfettered participation by all our area citizens as “stakeholders,” in the legislative process of influencing state “leadership.” 


Having taken the time to directly communicate to the Executive Directors of both Door and Kewaunee County’s Economic Development Corporations (D/KEDCs) with a couple simple suggestions for being more inclusive and less controlling over the issues allowed for April’s supposed community wide legislative lobbying efforts; I’ve not received one written word in response to my suggestions.


I’ve criticized the three applied pre-conditions of conformity for any issues suggested to be deemed worthy of lobbying efforts.  I’ve asked what issue isn’t potentially a state-wide or national issue and what issue can’t be argued as being controversial by someone and lastly, if we’re bringing any issue to Madison, it’s a forgone conclusion that we’ve not been able to resolve it locally.


Addressing youth disenfranchisement, I’ve directly suggested to most of our area school superintendents and to both our county government sponsors of the D/KEDCs that using our young adults to lobby for efforts dictated to them by political and/or by corporate economic interests is nothing but a public relations gimmick to bolster the community image of our D/KEDCs.  To disingenuously recruit our youth to lobby under contrived, controlled and dictatorial conditions is usury, short-sighted and unconscionable. 


As supposed “adult,” community leaders, frequently lamenting how difficult it is to keep our young adults interested in remaining in the area for the (readily debatable) good job opportunities locally, perhaps we should instead be encouraging our youth to be discussing, selecting and voicing their own critical issues during this lobbying opportunity instead of dictating to them, the terms and talking points for their participation.  


Looming student debt for post-secondary education, global warming, universal health care, fair wages, open government, decriminalizing cannabis use or ending racial oppression are issues that our young adults might want to have the opportunity to champion.  Respecting these young people, their opinions, abilities and ideas is the logical first step to engendering constructive future community involvement, loyalty and civic engagement. 


As “adults,” let’s not waste this golden opportunity for deliberate and honest inclusion of our youth, their ideas and future vision, through our own continued ignorance or arrogance, or the apparent official economic development and local government sanctioning of unquestionable irresponsibility and social detriment currently defining the terms and conditions promoting D/K Legislative Days.


Democracy depends on open government

They say what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, but when it comes to public records, the state Legislature doesn’t seem to believe in this principle. 

In Wisconsin, cities, police and fire departments, state agencies, and even the governor’s office are required to retain public records and make these available to the public. For example, emails generated by staff in the Department of Justice must be retained for three years from the date of creation and then transferred to the Wisconsin Historical Society or UW-Madison archives. For most of our state’s history, these rules also applied to those who wrote the laws. 

But decades ago, when it wrote the law, the Legislature decided to exempt itself from having to retain most records. This exemption means the state’s 99 representatives and 33 senators can simply destroy or delete records in their possession that they would like to shield from public scrutiny. 

This quirk in the law has been used by some legislators to protect constituents’ personal information, and by others to hide their communications with corporate interest groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. And I know that some of my colleagues in the Senate make it a point to delete their calendars daily.


For a state with a rich history of transparency and with technological advancement, this double standard is no longer acceptable. State lawmakers should have to comply with the same record-keeping standard they require for others.  


Unfortunately, we have seen transparency slide in the opposite direction in recent years. In 2015, Republican lawmakers passed a budget “999 motion” to limit what records they needed to provide. It was removed from the budget only after public outcry. The Legislature has also limited what the public can know about campaign contributors. 

I believe, as I recently told a Milwaukee TV station, that the ability of lawmakers to destroy records is an invitation to corruption, Already, we have seen that some lawmakers have been destroying the emails they received urging them to vote against the package of lame-duck bills they passed in December.

Our public tax dollars pay for all of the functions the lawmakers perform. The public has a right to see records that show who is exerting influence over these allocations.


The fix is easy. We can simply pass a law to delete the legislative exemption to record keeping and bring the state Legislature in line with the Public Records Management and Preservation Program.     

This coming legislative session, I will reintroduce a bill I co-authored in 2011 with former state Senators Tim Cullen and Jim Holperin to do away with this outdated exemption. When this bill was last introduced, legislative Republicans refused to even give it a public hearing. 

Unfortunately, those in power rarely give it up willingly. What’s needed is a loud and unified public demanding that lawmakers’ records be kept safe and available upon request. 

There’s a saying that sums all this up nicely: “We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.” There should not be 132 standards for record keeping in the Wisconsin Legislature; there should be only one standard of transparency.


Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Wisconsin state Senator Chris Larson represents Wisconsin’s 7th Senate District and is the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Committee on Education.

Sheriff-elect shows class and confidence

Door County may have just elected one of the most self-confident and self-assured sheriffs in Wisconsin history.

Tammy Sternard won a race as a Democratic for Door County Sheriff. She has kept in place her opponent, Chief Deputy Pat McCarty, who ran against her for sheriff as a Republican. That keeps McCarty in the number two position in the department and in a perfect place to mount a campaign for sheriff in the future.

Far too many in politics today view their opponent as an enemy. Apparently, Tammy Sternard has enough self-confidence to rise above traditional politics.

By keeping Chief Deputy McCarty in his position Sternard shows class and confidence. She sends a strong message that she is above the expected partisan politics of retribution that is far too pervasive today.

Sternard replaces another sheriff who demonstrated the same non-partisanship that should be part of the office. Steve Delarwelle served Door County as an effective, quiet and confident leader. Delarwelle never sought publicity. He was a professional law enforcement officer and never a typical politician. And he was smart enough to win a competitive race for sheriff.

These two people, both of whom Door County should be proud, are examples of why being a sheriff should not be a partisan office. Administering a law enforcement agency has nothing to do with being Republican or Democrat. Today, it has more to do with how to reduce recidivism, be smart rather than tough on crime and how to work in a community to prevent rather than punish criminal activity.

Tammy Sternard has a four-year example from Steve Delarwelle that she appears smart enough to follow. She’s off to very good start.

Now, lets get politics out of the courthouse and make positions like sheriff and county clerical positions like clerk, treasurer and register of deeds appointed rather than elected non-partisan positions.

And while that may take some time to accomplish, be confident Door County should be proud of retiring sheriff Delarwelle and his replacement, Tammy Sternard. May retirement bless you, Steve. And Tammy, may you and all with whom you serve be safe and protected.

That’s my opinion. I’d like to hear yours.

When most people make a $360,000 mistake there are consequences.

When most people make a $360,000 mistake there are consequences.
Not, apparently, if you’re the mayor of Sturgeon Bay or a former city administrator or county economic development director.

The Sturgeon Bay city council voted Tuesday to pay developer Robert Papke $360,000 to settle litigation over a failed hotel on the west-side waterfront.
Papke claims he was misled by officials who encouraged him to develop the hotel project but withheld information about the title to the property.

The city settled and taxpayers are footing the bill. Papke has said that those promoting the waterfront development “threw roses at my feet” to get him to invest the more than $500,000 in expenses related to the hotel. Those would include Mayor Thad Birmingham, former city administrator Steve McNeill, and former Door County Economic Director Bill Chaudoir. All three were involved in pushing the project and misleading Papke.

McNeill and Chaudoir have retired and Birmingham’s term as mayor expires in April.

The $360,000 payment to Papke could have patched a lot of potholes. There are better uses for taxpayer dollars than lawsuits and litigation. And if anyone in the private sector made the mistakes that have resulted in this settlement there would be consequences. Not, though, in city government, not even an apology from the people who got Sturgeon Bay into this mess in the first place.

Two are retired and one should be held accountable if he seeks another term as mayor of Sturgeon Bay.

That’s my opinion. I’d like to hear yours.

Search Our Site



Would you rather see the legislature increase the gas tax and receive funding from out-of-state visitors or increase the registration fee and only get more money from Wisconsin residents?
Add a Comment
(Fields are Optional)

Your email address is never published.

Sports Poll

Would you consider going to the Packers pre-season game in Canada?

Obituaries are provided as a service of the

Schinderle Funeral Home of Algoma



Sign up for our Daily Electronic Newspaper and/or our Shopping Show newsletter!


Get the latest news with our Daily Electronic Newspaper delivered to your inbox.


Get the latest updates for our Shopping Show delivered to your inbox every Friday.