Complaint

St Ought on Forward Complaint by catswoman05

Sign the Petition!

(click)

We Must Live Under the Rule of Law!

 

Hello Stoughton Citizens!

 

I have created a new petition site to for you to sign and comment as a supporter of the Stoughton Forward lawsuit against the city of Stoughton.  It demands the city follow the TIF law and re-start the approval process.

 

WE WILL TURN IN A PAPER COPY TO THE COUNCIL AT THE TUES. COUNCIL MEETING.  At this meeting the pro-KPW folks will be down one due to Hohol finally resigning for the council.  What will happen now I wonder?

 

Please sign the petition to the mayor and alders at this site.  http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/support-the-rule-of-law-stop-illegal-corporate

 

Please write your views in the comments section of the petition.  All who log on to the site will be able to read them.

 

We need plaintiffs and money as stated in the last email.

 

We have asked the Yahara River Grocery Coop to become plaintiffs in the lawsuits twice:  Once earlier when we thought we could do a suit.  Now recently for this lawsuit.

 

The Coop Board refuses to invite us to discuss the suit and makes its decisions based upon what they know.  This is a grave mistake in my opinion.  If the SuperCenter is built, we may find a vacant storefront in the years ahead.

 

Their response:

Dear Mr. Davis: 

The Yahara River Grocery Cooperative Board of Directors considered the request to join in Stoughton Forward's legal action against the city of Stoughton and determined unanimously not to join the lawsuit as an organization.  

The main reason for this decision is that the YRGC bylaws state in Principle 1 (Section I: Purpose — 1.1 Mission Statement) that its membership include and welcome everyone, no matter of each member’s gender, social status, race, political inclination, or religion – or any viewpoint whatsoever. 

There are over 1,200 members of the YRGC ownership family, some who may very much agree with Stoughton Forward’s initiative to sue the City of Stoughton and others who very much agree with the city’s actions regarding the KPW/TIF issue. It was strongly felt that those who do agree with Stoughton Forward on this issue and want to support the lawsuit have the freedom to sign on as co-plaintiffs individually. .

YRGC very much appreciates your support as a member-owner of the Co-op and we wish you the very best.

Yours,

The YRGC Board of Directors

The SF law suit is not a beauty contest asking a judge to decide who looks the nicest.  It is about following the rule of law in America.

 

You have a chance to stand up for the rule of law right here in little old Stoughton.

 

If we cannot try to uphold the law in our community we may be doomed.

 

At the national level the special interests are far stronger than here in Stoton.  The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are illegal.  They were illegal for Bush and they are illegal for Obama.  Many speak out to try to uphold the rule of law but are drowned out or ignored by the media and our "paid" politicians.

 

Can YOU stand up for the rule of law in Stoughton home town?  Sign here:   http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/support-the-rule-of-law-stop-illegal-corporate

 

Peace!

Buzz Davis

CONFLICT OF INTEREST?

Sent: 7/21/2015 1:19:19 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Questions regarding Alders Hohol and Christianson

To:  Lana Kropf, Clerk, City of Stoughton

 

Hohol issue resolved.

 

2.  Would you please tell me if Alder Ron Christianson has had or has a contract with the city to conduct office cleaning for the city of Stoughton?

 

If this is true, how long has this contract been in existence, what is the approximate dollar cost for each contract and does he presently have such a contract with the city?

 

The existence of an alder having a special relationship with the city resulting in a monetary gain, creates certain ethical conflicts for certain votes.

 

And such a monetary relationship may create certain power relationship conflicts between the mayor who drafts the city budget and the alder that has a monetary interest in having a personal business contract within each budget, voting on that budget and on other matters before the council which the mayor has great interest in.

 

Has the city or Alder Christianson asked for a ruling from the city Ethics Board on this situation?

 

Thank you for your time.

 

Buzz Davis,

7/21/15 - WE NEED PLAINTIFFS

Hello SF email group!

We have only made it this far because we have stuck together, educated each other on the massive amount of details of the KPW effort, donated to what needs to be done and done all the work we have tried to do.

We have been one of the most successful citizen efforts in the USA in fighting back against ill concieved developerment and corporate welfare under the guise of TIF.  As you know CA and AZ have already outlawed TIF because it is run-away-subsidies to pvt. developers - the rich get richer.  But as you can see the media is part of the problem.  They do not care or know their owners will not like stories about communities fighting back against developement, thus no stories.  Thus the greater public in Stougton is just a bit less ignorant on what is going on here than the public in Oregon and Evansville which may lose their Bill's and PiggleWiggley grocery stores to the WalMart money vacume.

So can YOU help some more this week?

1.  We need more plaintiffs!

2.  We need to do another round of envelope on the door of each business asking them to stand up for their community and themselves and become a plaintiff!

3.  We need to raise more money for the court suit!

4.  We need to do thank you letters to all our Stoton Fwd. and Vote YES donators and ask them for some more money (Yoli and Lois have volunteered.)!

5.  We probably need a town hall meeting to outline the court suit, do a press conference before that meeting, etc.

6.  We could do a press conference at the KPW site so the media would have us standing on the hill on the road just south of Hwy. 138.  We need some alders and citizens to speak.

7.  We need to do - what else can you dream up???

This week we MUST get more plaintiffs and we need business plaintiffs most of all.  Now is your time to help.  The questionnaire you need to give to the business person is attached.  He/she fills that out and sends it to me or Dennis G. via email.

Below is the letter to the editor that will probably be in the HUB this Thurs.

Attached is a longer copy that I will use as a basis of the press release I will hopefully draft and send out late tonight if all goes well.  I need some comments for the press release regarding city actions, our law suit, following the law, whatever you wish to say. 

Please just write up a sentence or five or so and send it to me and I will work it in.  I believe alders CANNOT be part of the suit but it is permissible for them to write why they voted as they did, etc.  Note we told all the alders in a letter from our attorney what was "wrong" with what the city was doing.  That letter/email is attached.

We have raised $4,300 towards the law suit.  I sent Dennis G. $4,200 for our client trust acct. at this firm to go toward paying our legal costs for phase one of the lawsuit - which is getting all the documents to the court. 

Roger Thompson served the summons on the city, the developer and WalMart on Friday.  So that is all done.  Defendants have 45 days to respond.

Dennis G. asked for a temporary injunction of all KPW actions until the judge can decide the case.  The defendants' lawyers will try to prove that all the plaintiffs have NO LEGAL STANDING TO MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THE COURT. 

WalMart will have a fleet of $500 per hr. lawyers at the hearing requesting the injunction and they will be attempting to confuse the judge into dismissing the complaint.

Thus we need business people who have a direct loss facing them to be plaintiffs.  I can not do this alone.  We need YOU to help us get some businesspersons as plaintiffs.  All this work we have done of the last two years hinges on this lawsuit.

The questionnaire for you to discuss with your business friend is attached.

IF THEY (the WalMart and other lawyers) knock us off as plaintiffs, the case is done - regardless of whether the laws are violated or not.

I will send the Coop's response to you all next - stunning as it is.

Plaintiff Form Dennis G by catswoman05

SHOULD OUR CITY FOLLOW THE LAW?

In a message dated 7/20/2015 6:58:28 P.M. Central Daylight Time, DBuzzdavis@aol.com writes:

Should Our City Follow the Law?

Last  Thursday Stoughton Forward filed a lawsuit against the City, Kettle Park West (KPW) LLC and WalMart Real Estate Business Trust.

Why?  The lawsuit alleges that the amended Developer's Agreement is invalid, the council's resolution to approve a three party agreement (city, KPW & WM) is invalid and the three party agreement itself is invalid  --  because the state's Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) law requires that specific procedures be followed when a city significantly amends an approved TIF project plan.

The lawsuit alleges the changes made to the above documents meet the level of significant amendments to the TIF project plan.

These major amendments are that WalMart, the richest corporation in the world, will now receive the city's $5 million in TIF funds under the following conditions:  If the KPW LLC goes bankrupt, or cannot follow thru with the construction of the $5 million in public improvements for the new mall anchored by a SuperCenter, the city will give WalMart the $5 million and WM will then construct the public improvements or WM can require the city to spend the $5 million on public improvements.

These major amendments were made in violation of state law requiring public notice and a public hearing before the planning commission and review and approval of the proposed changes by the planning commission, the council and the joint review board.

Of course, the law is so written to ensure that significant amendments to TIF projects DO receive public input and proper consideration by all the government jurisdictions involved.

Prior to the Mayor's and council's approvals, Stoughton Forward's attorney emailed the council and outlined the questionability of its proposed actions under the law and I spoke to the council during public comment.  This advice was disregarded.

As individuals and as governments, we must try to live under the rule of law.  If we do not, we will live under the rule of political whims and power plays and public money will be wasted.

Stoughton Forward urges citizens, who believe individuals and governments should be required to follow the law, to join us as plaintiffs in our law suit.  The cost to join is zero.  The cost to let Stoughton violate state laws will be substantial.

7/22/15 PRESS RELEASE

Press Release -- For Immediate Release  --  Wednesday, July 22, 2015

Should the City of Stoughton be Forced to Follow the Law

When Agreeing to Give $5 Million in TIF Money to WalMart?

Stoughton Forward (SF) filed a lawsuit on July 16, 2015 in Dane County Circuit Court against the City of Stoughton, Kettle Park West (KPW) LLC and WalMart (WM) Real Estate Business Trust.  The lawsuit charges that the city has conducted illegal approvals and agreements related to the KPW development project.

The city and the developer have been planning a new mall anchored by a WalMart SuperCenter just west of the city for 5 years.  For years the city and developer kept the name of the big box store SECRET from the public.  The city intends to give the developer $5 million in Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) money because the developer says he cannot afford to do the project without such corporate welfare.  The city will borrow the $5 million, using short term notes, at a cost of possibly $2 million or more in interest over a 20 or so year period to pay off the loans.  The city avoided using the normal municipal bonding process because the mayor and half the alders were afraid the voters would reject the issuance of bonds.  The bonding process would have been a safer and less costly method of financing the borrowing.

The community voted in a set of referendum questions last April.  Sixty percent (60%) of the voters voted against the corporate welfare, 53% voted against the overall Kettle Park West project and 78% of the voted to have the city focus its efforts on re-developing Stoughton's beautiful Downtown and riverfront.

The citizen group Stoughton Forward has been actively fighting back against the KPW project for nearly two years.

Why a law suit now?  The lawsuit alleges that the recently approved Amended Developer's Agreement (between the city and KPW LLC) is invalid, the city council's recent resolution to approve a three party agreement (city, KPW & WM) is invalid and the recent three party agreement itself is invalid.  All are invalid because the state's Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) law requires that specific procedures be followed when a city significantly amends an approved TIF project plan (WI law Sec. 66.1105(h)).

The lawsuit alleges the changes made to the above documents meet the level of significant amendments to the TIF project plan.

These major amendments are that WalMart, the richest corporation in the world, will now receive the city's $5 million in TIF funds under the following conditions:  If the KPW LLC goes bankrupt, or cannot follow thru with the construction of $5 million in public improvements for the mall, then the city will give WalMart the $5 million and WM will construct the public improvements or WM can require the city to spend the $5 million on public improvements.

These major amendments were made by Mayor Donna Olson and half the council in violation of state law requiring public notice and a public hearing before the Stoughton Planning Commission followed by review and approval of the proposed changes by the Planning Commission, the city council and the joint review board.

SF alleges that the city chose to ignore the law because Mayor Olson is unwilling to face the public scrutiny, opposition and questioning that would result if she followed the law.

Local activist Buzz Davis, treasurer of Stoughton Forward, said, "The state law is specifically written to require that the whole review process start over when the parties make significant changes to the agreements AFTER the original review and approval process is completed.  For example if the amount of the TIF gift to the developer jumped from the approved $5 million to say $10 million, would the city think that is just a "minor change" not needing re-approvals?  In this specific case, the city has now decided that if the developer goes belly up that is it just fine to give WalMart, world's richest corporation, $5 million in TIF money.  Our attorney will argue in court that such an amendment is a "significant amendment" which, under state law, requires the re-start of the approval process."

Davis stated the mayor, council and city attorney were told of the state law requiring the restart of the approval process BEFORE they considered and approved the changes.  Stoughton Forward's attorney emailed Davis.  Davis emailed the mayor and council prior to the June 23, 2015 meeting.  Davis then gave all officials a paper copy of the email at the meeting and outlined the email during the public comment period.

Davis said, "All such advice was disregarded.

As individuals and as governments, we must try to live under the rule of law.  If we do not, we will live under the rule of political whims and power plays.  And public money will be wasted.

Our city ordinances require any developer pay for the entire public infrastructure (water, sewer, electricity, gas, roads, etc.) required for any development.  This ordinance has served Stoughton well for 50 years.  But the state TIF law enables the city to bypass city ordinances and GIVE taxpayer money directly to a developer so he/she does not have to pay for the public infrastructure.

Would any reasonable individual say that WalMart should be given $5 million by Stoughton taxpayers to pay for these public improvements because WalMart cannot afford to pay for the improvements?"

Davis asked, "How can half the council and the mayor vote in favor of giving WalMart $5 million in corporate welfare after they have been specifically told what the law requires and they each know that the majority of community residents are against such welfare and are against the entire project?  I find it astounding.

The Kettle Park West project is using borrowed government money to subsidize super wealthy WalMart.  WM will then turn around and compete against our local businesses in Stoughton, Oregon, Evansville, Edgerton and McFarland.  The city will have tilted the playing field in favor of WalMart which will then drive some merchants out of business leaving vacant downtown storefronts, unemployed workers and broken lives.  Research has shown that for every 1 new job at a WalMart store 1 to 1.4 present retail jobs are lost.  The SuperCenter is project to create 100 new jobs thus causing 100 or 140 present workers to lose their jobs.  This is not community development.  It's community destruction -- using public money.

I ask just what part of NO do Mayor Olson and the pro-KPW alders not understand?"

"Stoughton Forward urges citizens, who believe individuals and governments should be required to follow the law, to join them as plaintiffs in their law suit.  The cost to join is zero.  The cost to let Stoughton violate state laws will be substantial.  We must all fight back against government corruption and corporate welfare," Davis concluded.

BUZZ TO MEDIA: Games Stoughton Plays

6-29-15 email from Buzz Davis to Selected Dane Co. Reporters

  

Dear Media Representatives!

 

Below is an example of the "games" Stoughton city staff are playing with the simple question of:  What is the effective date of the more recent KPW Developer's Agreement.

 

Simply put - the attached DA shows one date of June 9, 2015 and others dates that show June 18, 2015.

 

Under state law individuals or groups have 30 days from the time the contract is "signed" to file a lawsuit in court.

 

Thus Stoughton Forward which is considering a court suit has 30 days which end like July 9th or maybe July 18th.

 

At the June 23rd council meeting the DA was to come up for reconsideration.  The city kept secret from the alders that the mayor had already signed the DA.  I believe all or most of the alders found out on June 23rd that the mayor had already signed the DA and many were stunned.

 

In early 2014 when the previous DA was passed by the council and the meeting concluded at 12:30 or so at night, Alder Majewski told the alders and city attorney that he was going to move reconsideration of the passage of the DA at the next meeting (two weeks later.)

 

The mayor then signed the DA that night between 12 and 2AM, after I believe, consulting with the city attorney on how to circumvent that alder's intentions.

 

The ruling was, at the next council meeting, that Alder Majewski's motion to reconsider was out of order.

 

Yet this time, because the DA was passed June 9th with an amendment that $.5 million in construction contingency fund could NOT be spent before the construction started, and because the mayor wanted to say that the DA was signed but wanted to delete that amendment, she ruled June 23rd that the motion for reconsideration was valid but only dealt with the amendment not the DA because the DA had been signed.

 

If you follow this congratulations.  If you don't follow it you are like 99.9% of the public and maybe alders who say, "Huh, what just happened??"

 

As you may or may not know the DA passed by the council on June 9th had one other "minor" change.

 

WalMart had demanded that if the KPW development company goes belly up that WalMart wants the city to use the $5 million in TIF money to still pay for all the public improvements for the proposed SuperCenter or give the TIF money to WalMart and WalMart will then do the required construction.

 

On June 9 the council voted for this on a 6-6 split vote with the mayor then voting yes.

 

Some of us feel that such a major change to the TIF project is illegal under state law. 

 

Secondly, the "but for" clause required for TIF funding of a developer just might be a hard clause to prove if the recipient of the TIF money is WalMart - the largest and richest corporation in the world.

 

Buzz Davis, Treas. Stoughton Forward

Report: Walmart State and Local Tax Avoidance Exceeds $400 Million Annually

(click on image)

Wisconsin FOIA Request

Wisconsin FOIA Request

From:  Leslie W. Davis III - 6/29/15 
To:  Lana Kropf, City Clerk


Dear Clerk Kropf:


Under the Wisconsin Open Records Law, §19.31 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records that provide the exact date the city attorney concludes that the Amended and Restated Developer's Agreement with KPW LLC/FDG, passed by the city council June 9, 2015, was effective.
The question asked in the emails below was a simple one and I ask for the city attorney's conclusion as to the effective date.  I have explained below that the DA you sent has a number of different dates.

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $1.  However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the Kettle Park West project.  This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.


I request a response in writing, within the 5 days described by law, if you intend to deny this request.  Also, if you expect a significant delay in fulfilling this request, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.


If you deny any or all of this request, please cite each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.
Thank you for considering my request.


Sincerely, Leslie W. Davis III, Treasurer

Dear Mr. Davis - Open records are now closed

In a message dated 6/29/2015 1:59:51 P.M. Central Daylight Time, dolson@ci.stoughton.wi.uswrites:

Good Afternoon Mr Davis,

You have received a signed copy of the Second Amended and Restated Agreement to Undertake Development. Neither Clerk Kropf nor I are able to provide you with the legal information you have requested.

Under the continued threat of law suit, neither I nor city staff will be able to continue to field such questions or dialogue regarding the Kettle Park West Development. 

Mayor Donna Olson

Dear Lana: June 24th, June 27th

Hello Lana!

Would you please take time to answer this question on Monday?  The information is critical to our law suit and it appears to me that the city is stalling in answering a simple question.

Thank you!

Buzz Davis, Treas., Stoughton Forward, 608-239-5354 cell#

---

From: DBuzzdavis@aol.com
To: LKropf@ci.stoughton.wi.us
CC: bill.livick@wcinet.com, dennisglaw@gmail.com
Sent: 6/24/2015 6:16:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: What is the effect date of the DA?

To:  Stoughton City Clerk Lana Kropf

Fr:  Buzz Davis, Treas., Stoughton Forward, 608-239-5354

Under state law, a case must be filed within a certain number of days after a contract is signed and has become effective.

What is the legal effect date of the Second Amended and Restated Agreement to Undertake Development?  (your document is attached)

On the first page of the attached DA it says that the agreement was entered into June 9, 2015.

On page 20 it says the mayor and clerk signed the document.  The date on the saved copy of the DA in your computer system says that the file was saved on June 16, 2015.  Were the two signatures signed that day June 16th.

On page 21 it says that the financial director signed it on June 18, 2015.

On page 27 it says the mayor and clerk signed that document on June 18, 2015.

On page 33 it says the mayor and clerk signed that document on June 18, 2015.

Therefore I ask what is the legal date that this DA was effective?  June 9, 2015 or June 18, 2015 or some other date.

Thank you!

Buzz Davis

A Different TIF Process

Below is a TIF process that is a far different process than that used in Stoughton.  Stoughton's negotiations seem to be done in secret.

We have tried and tried to get the council to review other TIF policies and formats for doing TIF developments.  The city under Adler Lawrence has refused to do what the council directed years ago.  Now 5 years after the KPW fiasco the city is slowly moving to review and modify it's policy.  And it should be noted the city does NOT even follow the policy it now has.  And the policy it now has is only for re-development not building on farmland.

The TIF requirements SHOULD be an ordinance NOT a policy and go through a public hearing process.  The city powers (mayor and pro-growthers) want a policy so it gets no review and can easily be pushed aside by any council on a given evening.

This is poor government.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

From:     Thomas J. Mertz <tjmertz@sbcglobal.net>
To:          Discuss PD <pddiscuss@prodane.org>
Sent:      Sunday, June 28, 2015 9:20 AM
Subject: City, JDS Development negotiators produce basic terms of a deal for Judge Doyle Square

Financial terms include:

A private investment by JDS of at least $130 million. City funding to replace Government East parking of $19.2 million and city capital funding for the bike center of $1 million. City investment of $42.5 million in other elements of the project. That includes a $12 million grant to Exact Sciences to create and retain 400 jobs at the site for at least 12 years, a $20.8 million loan for private parking and a $ 9.7 million loan for the fair market value of the land acquired for the private development.

 The negotiating team also requests eight specific exceptions from city TIF loan underwriting policies and seven exceptions from TIF goals, objectives and process. The report also highlights areas still to be resolved, largely in the area of guarantees

Read more:

(click on the image)

Thomas J. Mertz
Department of History
Edgewood College
tjmertz@sbcglobal.net

Law Suit Against the City

IT'S YOUR TIME TO FIGHT BACK AGAINST CORPORATE WELFARE!

Hello Stoughton Citizens!

LAW SUIT AGAINST CITY.

We believe that the City of Stoughton is NOT following the State of WI Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) law.  Stoughton Forward is now collecting donations to enable us to file a law suit against the city in Dane County Court.  It must be filed within a few weeks.

In order to file, we must raise $5,000 or more to prepare the suit and file it.  If the city, the developer and or WalMart decide to fight the suit it will cost another $5,000 or more.

At this point, we are asking for donations to help us raise the first $5,000.  We currently have over $2,700 in cash and pledges.  Thus we have about $2,300 more to go to be able to give our attorney the go ahead to prepare the suit. 

We must give that go ahead in the next few days.

He will send me a brief outline tomorrow or Saturday and I will forward it to you all along with an update on fund raising.

TIF LAWS.

In summary the city has now agreed to give WalMart $5 million, and possibly more, to reimburse WalMart for constructing the public infra-structure needed for the Kettle Park West mall if KPW LLC goes bankrupt.

This is a significant change to the project plan and the Developer's Agreement.  On behalf of Stoughton Forward I sent our attorney Dennis Grzezinski's letter to the mayor and council on 6-23-15.  That letter is below and  outlines what we believe to be potential law violations.  I have highlighted some sections.

The council and mayor paid no attention to the letter or what I said at the public comment period -- nothing new there!

PLEASE DONATE!!  If you can, please send a donation for any amount.  We are grateful for all donations.  You all have donated $10,000 or so in the last 1.5 years to fight back against our city.  Our mayor and half the council refuse to listen to citizens.  They push ahead with corporate welfare payments using our tax dollars against the will of 60% of the voters..

Checks Should Be Made Out To:  Stoughton Forward

Please Send To:

Stoughton Forward %

Buzz Davis, Treasurer

1021 Riverview Dr.

Stoughton, WI 53589

You may also drop the check or cash in our mail box on the porch.  If you choose to donate cash please also included you name, address, phone and email for our records.                

If you decide to donate, please email me back now and let me know about how much it might be.  We have to move fast and I may give the approval to our attorney to start work before I actually receive the checks in the mail.

Lastly, please consider forward this email to your email friends with a note on your views of what is happening and how small or large contributions will be appreciated.

WalMart is about the largest corporation is the world, is a tax cheat, receives billions of dollars in government subsidies, pays very low wages, has goods made in sweat shops in  China and other countries, its stores kill local downtowns, for every one new WM worker the local retail area loses 1 to 1.4 present better paying retail jobs and on and on.

It is abhorrent that the mayor of a city that does not have enough money to repair its roads, would work for years over the objections of the majority of the community to give corporate welfare to a developer and now WalMart.

Just how dumb can we get?  Take action now.  Donate a buck or more to help stop this foolishness in court.  Our city must follow the law.  It is regretful that citizens must take action and spend their own hard earned money to force their city hall staff and mayor and alders to follow the law.

Here Are All the Reasons Walmart’s Business Is Not Sustainable

Was the DA signed?

From:    BUZZ - 6/17 - 10:59 a.m.
To:         Rodney J. Scheel
Subject: May I get a copy of the bid summary sheet for the 2nd rebid

Hi Rodney!

Would you please send me a copy of the KPW bid summary sheet if the bids have already been opened?

If the mayor signed the amended DA, would you please send me a copy of that final also.

~~~~~~SCHEEL RESPONSE~~~~~~

From: rjscheel@ci.stoughton.wi.us - 6/17 - 3:20 p.m.

Buzz,

Bids have not been received.  The bid date was moved from Thursday, June 18^th to Thursday, June 25^th at 2:00 as part of Addendum #3 that was issued today.

I do not have a copy of the signed Development Agreement.  I will forward your request to City Clerk Lana Kropf.

Rodney Scheel

~~~~~~BUZZ TO CLERK KROPF~~~~~~
From:     BUZZ - 6/19 - 7:26 a.m.

To:          Lana Kropf
Subject: May I get a copy of the bid summary sheet for the 2nd rebid

Hi Lana!

1.  Has the mayor signed the Developer's Agreement with KPW after the council's action at it last meeting?  If so, would you pls. send me a copy of the signed DA?

2.  Is the DA going to be on the agenda

~~~~~~KROPF RESPONSE~~~~~~

From:   LKropf@ci.stoughton.wi.us - 6/19 - 9:53 a.m.

To:        DBuzzdavis@aol.com
Subj:     May I get a copy of the bid summary sheet for the 2nd rebid

Mr. Davis,

The Developer’s Agreement has not been signed by all parties yet. I have attached a copy of the agenda for you to review.

Thank you.

Lana C Kropf

~~~~~~BUZZ TO OLSON~~~~~~From:     BUZZ - 6/23 - 10:23 p.m.

To:          Donna Olson; Tim Swadley; Sonny Swangstu; Paul Lawrence; Ron Christianson; Michael Engelberger; Greg Jenson; Tricia Suess; Eric Hohol; Tom Selsor; Thomas Majewski; Pat O' Connor; Sid Boersma
Cc:          bill.livick@wcinet.com; dennisglaw@gmail.com
Subject:  Signing of the Developer's Agreement

Dear Mayor and Council:

I ask two simple questions and I would like response.

1.  Mayor, on what date and time did you sign the amended Developer's Agreement and on what dates did all the other parties sign the agreement and did you inform any alders that the DA had been signed?.  I would like an electronic copy of the signed agreement please.

2.  Alders approximately when did you know that the DA was signed by the mayor?

When I re-read my emails to staff, I find that I have been asking since June 17th which is 7 days ago.  For 7 days no staff could give a simple yes or no answer as to whether the DA had been signed.

As you and the city attorney know the time limit to file a court suit is 30 days from signing.  A cynical person would say the city is trying to run out the clock.

~~~~~~OLSON RESPONSE~~~~~~

6/24/2015 - 3:51p.m.
dolson@ci.stoughton.wi.us writes:

Lana has sent a signed copy of the developer’s agreement to Mr Davis today.

Donna

~~~~~~BUZZ TO OLSON~~~~~~

From:    BUZZ - 6/24 - 4:50 p.m. 

To:         Donna Olson; Tim Swadley; Sonny Swangstu; Paul Lawrence; Ron Christianson; Michael Engelberger; Greg Jenson; Tricia Suess; Eric Hohol; Tom Selsor; Thomas Majewski; Pat O' Connor; Sid Boersma
Cc:         bill.livick@wcinet.com; dennisglaw@gmail.com
Subject: Signing of the Developer's Agreement

Mayor Olson, I ask again did you formally inform the council that you had signed the DA and when did you do that.

Pls. answer the question and stop the avoidance.

~~~~~~OLSON RESPONSE~~~~~~

6/25/2015 - 9:28 a.m.
dolson@ci.stoughton.wi.us writes:

Good Morning,

I did not formally inform the Council that I had signed the developer’s agreement. Contracts are signed after Council action and approval. It is not past, nor current practice to inform Council of contract signing.  Contracts are signed after Council approval.

Donna

~~~~~~BUZZ TO OLSON~~~~~~

From:   BUZZ - 6/25 - 12:53 P.M.

To:       dolson@ci.stoughton.wi.us

CC:      TSwadley@ci.stoughton.wi.us, sswangstu@ci.stoughton.wi.us, plawrence@ci.stoughton.wi.us, rchristianson@ci.stoughton.wi.us, MEngelberger@ci.stoughton.wi.us, GJenson@ci.stoughton.wi.us, TSuess@ci.stoughton.wi.us, EHohol@ci.stoughton.wi.us, TSelsor@ci.stoughton.wi.us, TMajewski@ci.stoughton.wi.us, PatOConnor@ci.stoughton.wi.us, SBoersma@ci.stoughton.wi.us, bill.livick@wcinet.com, dennisglaw@gmail.com, MDREGNE@staffordlaw.com

Subj:   Questions Regarding Discussion of Signed DA with Alders Prior to 6-23-15 Meeting

Thank you for your response Mayor Olson!

You state you did NOT formally inform the council that you had signed the Amended Developer's Agreement after it was approved at the 6-9-15 council meeting.

1.  Did you inform any of the alders of your signing of the DA prior to the 6-23-15 meeting.  If so how many were informed and who?

2.  If you informed any alders, why did you inform those alders and not all the alders?

3.  If you informed any alders, did you discuss with any of these alders prior to the 6-23-15 meeting how you and the attorney were going to handle Alder Jenson's request for reconsideration?

Thank you!

Buzz Davis, Treas., Stoughton Forward, 608-239-5354

Failed land deal puts woman, 87, in tax bind

BUZZ TO OLSON: Is Walmart's non-profit foundation making donations to the City of Stoughton?

From: DBuzzdavis@aol.com
To: dolson@ci.stoughton.wi.us
CC: tswadley@ci.stoughton.wi.us, SSwangstu@ci.stoughton.wi.us, PLawrence@ci.stoughton.wi.us, RChristianson@ci.stoughton.wi.us, mengelberger@ci.stoughton.wi.us,Gjenson@ci.stoughton.wi.us, tsuess@ci.stoughton.wi.us, ehohol@ci.stoughton.wi.us, tselsor@ci.stoughton.wi.us, TMajewski@ci.stoughton.wi.us, poconnor@ci.stoughton.wi.us,sboersma@ci.stoughton.wi.us, bill.livick@wcinet.com, stoughtoneditor@wcinet.com
Sent: 6/24/2015 10:42:30 A.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Has the SFDept or other city departments received Donations from WalMart?

To:  Mayor Olson

Fr:  Buzz Davis, Treas., Stoughton Forward, 239-5354

I have recently heard rumors that the Stoughton Fire Department has received donations from the WalMart foundation.

Would you please confirm or deny and if confirmed explain the donation when and the amount.

Have any other departments received donations from WM and if so pls. explain.

Thank you!

~~~~~~MAYOR OLSON'S RESPONSE~~~~~~

Sent: 6/24/2015 3:12:38 P.M. Central Daylight Time

Good Afternoon,

I have confirmed with Chief Wegner that the Fire Department has not recently received donations from the WalMart foundation. It is however, common for WalMart to donate water for the Fire, EMS and Police departments during emergency situations. 

I have asked our Finance Department to identify donations from the WalMart foundation within the last 5 years. They are as follows:

9-15-14         $1,000          Safety Camp

9-8-14           $1,000          Arts Council

4-1-13           $1,000          Safety Camp

8-16-12         $2,500          K-9 Donations

11-17-11       $1,400          Food Pantry

10-21-11       $2,000          Safety Camp

Total Donations $8,900

Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Donna

Donating $5 million to Walmart? Take Action!

Dear Stoughton Citizens!

Please keep up if you can!  Before you read or skim this you may wish to get a cup of coffee and an aspirin -  because if you're not angry with our city, you have not been paying attention.

The questions before you are:

1.  Just how much do you wish to be taken for a sucker?

Does $5 million sound good?  Does $7 million plus interest sound better?

2.  How can you fight back to save our city and your community?

Regarding question #2 my next email will talk about that.  But first please learn about the situation we face.

   

We have crumbling roads in the city, the schools have no personal computers for all kids and NOW the mayor of Stoughton has got the "go along" council to approve giving WalMart $5 million plus in TIF money to build the public improvement (roads and utilities) if the KPW LLC goes belly up.  You will give the richest corporation in the world 5 million bucks.

On June 2nd, WalMart told the city lawyer (who is the city lawyer by title but seems to work for the mayor who seems to work for the developer and WalMart) that without an agreement that the city would give WalMart the TIF money, WalMart would pull out of the KPW mall deal.

By June 9th the "city" attorney, I use that term loosely,  took it upon himself to draft a new Developer's Agreement.  The council did not instruct him to do so.  But at that meeting the mayor placed the new DA on the agenda for action (no review by finance comm., no public hearing), "just approve it boys and girls."  And they did.

Did you know that?

If you said no, you are not alone.

The mayor signed the new DA.  The city council and the public were not even told by the mayor that she had signed the amended DA.  Some alders and myself only found out the DA had been signed at the meeting last night 6-23-15.

Ah, SECRECY pays (for them) & keeps YOU in the dark and keeps you forever behind on knowing what to do and how to fight back!

Last night the mayor announced only under questioning that she had signed the amended Developer's Agreement passed on June 9th yet the issue was on the council agenda June 23 for reconsideration.

When the council approved the second DA in early 2014, Alder Majewski said he was going to move reconsideration at the next meeting.  Olson signed the DA in the middle of the night.   Then at the next meeting the "city" attorney advised that Majewski could not move reconsideration because the Mayor has signed the DA which is considered a contract.

Ah, but this time, June 9, 2015, the mayor again signed the DA (when we have not been told yet).

But because she wanted to knock out the Swadley amendment approved by the council to NOT spend $.5 million in contingency funds until after the construction work had proceeded --- the "city" attorney finagled, along with Alder Hohol leading the charge, a way to knock that amend out.

Thus KPW LLC can now be given $.5 million more even before the construction starts because their delay after delay and mess ups have caused the bids to come in high.  The council will not formally approve this taxpayer give away of $.5 million until its meeting in July.

Result:  Once construction starts if there are any change orders due to unforeseen circumstances there will be no money to pay for them.  KPW LLC runs on a shoestring.  The lead developer Stienkraus owes $1.6 million personally to the Bank of Horicon and has made no payments.  This is all a dumb house of cards ready to fall at any minute.

Construction bids will be opened this Thurs.  They hope they are lower than the $1 million and $1.5 million over bids the first time.  The mayor and others have convinced the utilities to "give" hundreds of thousands of dollars of needed sand to KPW LLC in return for them doing some work on the new utilities unit to serve KPW.  Such a deal, huh!  Nobody got bids on how much this gift is worth.  It was just done.

Are you sick yet?  Has all the detail of reality put you to sleep?  This seems like Chicago politics to me. (See articles in other posts.)

All this KPW stuff will now be moving fast than even before. 

WalMart is a rogue corporation and our city and city council is in bed with them.  The six alders who have fought against this week after week are amazing!

Rogue corporation means they try to operate above the law by skirting the law with many high priced lawyers advising them.  Result is you, as a citizen, get taken.  

For your information, read the articles on the Walmart and TIF pages.

City of Madison $9 million loan to [Madison] school - Repayment through TIF district surplus

City may provide $9 million loan to school district with repayment through TIF district surplus