The Oldham County Watchdog

WILL OLDHAM COUNTY HAVE ANOTHER FISCAL COURT THAT DISRESPECTS THE LAW

2010-12-26T23:35:00.000-05:00

The Murner-led Fiscal Court is over for all intent and practical purposes. The court held its last meeting on December 21, 2010. Each Magistrate took the opportunity to express his/her gratitude for having been elected by their constituents. There was an unusual appearance of harmony among the Magistrates - probably more than since their first meeting four years ago.

Personally, I am very glad to see the end of the Murner-lead Fiscal Court. Judge Murner demonstrated a total disregard for the law - especially where open government was concerned. Many people were glad to see him reined in by a court of law over his illegal acts of secrecy. Murner has constantly bragged about achieving a balanced budget and ending his term with a major surplus. I never heard him say that he balanced that budget by raising taxes, which he significantly increased on Oldham County families. He always claimed that the balanced budget was due to cuts in personnel and other cuts in the budget; an example of misleading the public that was the trademark of the Murner administration. However, in the end the escalation of taxes and fees proved to be fatal to Murner’s hope of having his hand-picked successor be elected as County Judge/Executive. Still further, the escalation of taxes and fees also served to cause several Magistrates to fail in their endeavor to be re-elected. Some of them may not realize this or want to accept it, but any non-biased person can easily see it. That is what blind loyalty can do for you.

Now the obvious question is: will the incoming Magistrates be as blind as some of those whom they are replacing? They will get their first test at the first meeting on January 3, 2011. At that first meeting, the new County Judge/Executive, David Voegele, will present to the court/new Magistrates the names of several people that he will be hiring for their approval.

Of the names of the people Judge Voegele will present will be John Black, his brother-in-law. Judge Voegele has selected Black to be his deputy. The fact is that Voegele does not need the approval of the Fiscal Court for the position of Deputy County Judge/Executive. However, Voegele has stated that he would present Black to the court along with the names of his other new-hires. By doing this Voegele will be asking the Magistrates to violate the county administrative code - or at least condone his questionable selection. That is simply being insensitive to the members of the court. Seems like another County Judge we’ve seen over the past four years doesn’t it?

The present Oldham County code of ethics is part of the county administrative code. Section 4.3 (Nepotism) of the code states: “Members of any County government officer’s or employee’s immediate family are ineligible for employment by the Fiscal Court.”

The selection of John Black by David Voegele is clearly nepotism and should not be tolerated. Moreover, by Voegele asking the court to approve or condone the selection of Black he is showing disrespect for them and asking them to do something that that they may be criticized for doing by their constituents. He is also taking advantage of the fact that some of the members are new to the court and may not feel comfortable opposing him in the very first meeting. Although this may be a good tactical move by Voegele, it is unethical. The people of Oldham County will get a very good sense of the direction that this court will follow for the next four years. David Voegele can be assured that the people will not forget what he is doing.

Judge Voegele may say that he is selecting Black because he is very qualified by virtue of the fact that he was the County Judge before. That argument has several holes in it. First, the people of Oldham County no longer wanted Democrat John Black as County Judge as he was defeated in his bid for a third term by Mary Ellen Kinser. Second, surely Voegele had someone else in mind to be his deputy should John Black have been elected to the Kentucky State Senate seat that he sought, though he was soundly defeated by Republican Ernie Harris. Then there is the fact that the “end does not justify the means”, especially when the “means” result in a violation of the law; a law that John Black instituted when he was the County Judge. How ironic is that now? When John Black sought the change in the administrative code did he believe that the change should only be applicable to others and not him? In other words, do as I say, not as I do.

David Voegele still has time to correct his mistake but does he have the desire to do what is right or will it be full speed ahead, the law be dammed?

WILL POLITICS AND BAD HABITS EVER CHANGE IN OLDHAM COUNTY

2010-11-28T22:08:00.000-05:00

Does every elected County Judge-Executive believe that he has to help an old friend, relative, supporter, or someone who needs to enhance their state retirement benefits? First, Duane Murner hired Bill Tucker shortly after being elected County Judge-Executive and Tucker remains on the county payroll to this day. Tucker has been on social security for years and should have opted to allow a younger person who was in need of a job to be employed. However, he received a substantial increase in pay from his previous magisterial salary, after he was removed from office by the voters. Thus, his retirement will be increased significantly. Likewise, Judge Murner hired former magistrate Paula Gish to be his Deputy Judge-Executive and gave her a huge increase in salary. Again, her retirement will increase significantly due to this increase in pay. What is worse is that one of her duties has been to supervise the county payroll clerk and the state auditor said in an annual report that she was not qualified to do that. The payroll clerk was recently fired by County Judge Murner but Gish remains on the job making over $70K per year.

Well, David Voegele also has decided to help an old friend and relative increase his retirement. He decided to hire his brother-in-law, John Black, to be his deputy at a salary of over $55K per year. John Black has been driving a school bus in order to enhance his retirement. It is a great promotion when you go from school bus driver to Deputy County Judge. I once heard Voegele remark that it would be a great promotion for a person to go from janitor to county treasurer. He also remarked that it would make a great title for a story. I guess that he forgot that, or believes that it does not apply to him. I’m sorry David, but you can’t have it both ways.

David Voegele promised change throughout his campaign this past spring. As a matter of fact, he told me that he would make a lot of changes if the people would just give him a chance. He knows, or at least he should know, that many people voted for him because they felt that he was the lesser of two evils. Voegele has gotten his chance but so far I have not seen the change. Hiring his brother-in-law is not a change in practice from the past administration. To make matters worse, John Black is a staunch democrat who has been defeated in his last two attempts to achieve elective office. He was just recently soundly defeated by Ernie Harris in a bid for the Kentucky State Senate. Black ran on a democratic agenda which supported expanded gambling in Kentucky. Did that not tell David Voegele that the people of Oldham County have rejected John Black?

While we are on the issue of change, there are two more items that need to be addressed. Voegele railed against the huge debt that the county has amassed and the huge increase in the insurance premium tax rate. The first two items of business Voegele should have on his agenda are the reduction of the insurance premium tax by fifty percent and the retirement of some of the county debt. The county has a huge surplus at the present time (over $8 million) and can afford to accomplish both of these feats. If Voegele does not do this quickly, the county should not expect him to do anything that he promised. As a matter of fact, the people had better be on the defensive.

Since the primary election, Voegele has went against several of his campaign messages and disappointed many in the public. He voted to once again increase sewer rates by 25% and to add additional debt to the Fiscal Court budget through accepting debt taken on by the sewer district to finance their ongoing abysmal operations. The court voted to approve the measure by one vote, meaning Voegele’s vote in the opposite direction would have prevented the increase from becoming a reality.

Voegele also needs to make some personnel changes in his administration as soon as he takes office. He was also opposed by nearly all of the county government employees working in Judge-Executive Duane Murner’s office in addition to most of the department heads in county government. In fact, many of them worked extensively to support the candidacy of Paula Gish in the primary election. This includes employees making financial contributions to Gish, displaying yard signs, wearing campaign clothing at events, and openly supporting Gish whenever possible. He still has time to make those changes before he takes office, however it is questionable whether he has the stomach to make the tough decisions needed in this area.

I still believe that Voegele was the better choice for County Judge but my belief is fading fast.

HOW A LAME DUCK FISCAL COURT CONFRONTS ISSUES

2010-11-16T23:56:00.000-05:00

The November 16, 2010 meeting of the Oldham County fiscal court proved to be interesting. The court had several people in attendance from the Briar Hill and Spring Hill subdivisions.

Recently the Oldham Circuit Court ruled that there was not a valid approved subdivision plan for the Brentwood subdivision. This was the result of a lawsuit filed by residents of the Briar Hill and Spring Hill subdivisions. However, in spite of the decision of the Circuit Court there has been a road approved by the Oldham County Panning and Development Commission. According to residents who appeared at the fiscal court meeting, work on the subdivision continues even though there is no approved subdivision plan. Residents voiced concern for the safety of residents, especially children, due to excessive speed of drivers who use the new road as a means of bypassing Crestwood.

The residents had previously asked the court to close the road and have all work on the subdivision stopped. Judge Murner said that fiscal court has no jurisdiction in the matter since the court was not a defendant in the lawsuit. I doubt that this issue will go away.

In an unrelated matter Magistrate Bob Deibel made a motion that the court approve a new fifteen year contract with Insight cable company. Insight provides cable service for the majority of the citizens of Oldham County. However, Magistrate David Voegele, the Judge-Elect made a motion to table the issue. Voegele stated that he would like to consult with legal counsel in order that the county might gain further concessions from the cable company. Magistrate Scott Davis seconded the motion and the motion passed by a 7-2 vote. Magistrate Deibel and Judge Murner voted against Voegele’s motion. The current contract with Insight does not expire until August of 2011. Therefore, there should be no danger of the county being without cable service. What struck me as being odd about the vote was that the majority of the magistrates voted opposite of Judge Murner. I do not believe that would have happened a year ago. Perhaps Judge Murner has lost the rigid control that he appeared to have over the court until now. It is possible that some of the magistrates who were defeated now realize that their blind loyalty to Judge Murner contributed to their demise as magistrates.

Finally, Magistrate Steve Church stated that the finance committee had met to discuss the matter of retiring part of the county debt-specifically the part that relates to the community center. He stated that the finance committee decided to not recommend that the debt be retired but rather to allow the incoming court to make that decision. It is believed that Magistrate Rick Rash was the driving force behind retiring part of the county debt. Had the debt been retired it would have amounted to a savings of approximately one thousand dollars per week in interest payments. Magistrates David Voegele, Steve Greenwell and Steve Church make up the finance committee.

OLDHAM COUNTY JUDGE ELECT DAVID VOEGELE ANNOUNCES TWO APPOINTMENTS

2010-11-15T22:54:00.000-05:00

Oldham County Judge-Executive Elect David Voegele has released the names of two individuals he intends to recommend to Fiscal Court as part of the new administration in January.

Greg Smith, former Chief of the Louisville Division of Police, will be recommended to Oldham Fiscal Court as the replacement for former Chief Michael Griffin, who retired at the end of August. Voegele said he would like Smith’s title to be Director of Public Safety, rather than chief of police.

“The position will manage all police work but also additional responsibilities I would like to come under the supervision of the director of public safety,” Voegele indicated.

“Greg Smith is an outstanding police administrator, recognized widely in the law enforcement community as a consummate professional. I could not find anyone who did not have the highest respect for him,” Voegele said.

Judge-Executive Elect David Voegele said he interviewed 12 candidates to lead the Oldham County Police Department. “I felt each of the candidates was an excellent police officer, but Greg Smith brought more to the table in terms of being able to move Oldham County forward on a variety of issues.”

Chief Smith was a member of the Louisville Division of Police from 1974 through January 2003, when he joined the staff of Senator Jim Bunning. He will end his work for Senator Bunning when Bunning retires at the end of the year.

Chief Smith began his career path as a patrol officer in the First and Sixth Districts. Promotions through the years included detective, sergeant, lieutenant, assistant chief, deputy chief and chief. He has supervised all aspects of police services, including training, community development, narcotics, sex crimes, homicide and robbery units.

Smith is a graduate of Bellarmine University, and holds a Master’s Degree in Community Development from the University of Louisville. He also teaches law enforcement at Bellarmine. He will take over January first from Acting Chief Billy Way, who has accepted a position in business and will retire at the end of December.

Another appointment planned for the new administration includes a former director of Oldham County Planning and Zoning. Jim Urban, who was part of the administration of former Judge-Executive, John Black, will be recommended as the new director of Planning and Development, replacing Louise Allen who retired earlier this fall. Urban left Oldham County government in 2003.

“Jim’s prior experience in Oldham County, along with his knowledge of the development in the county, his management skills and abilities in economic development and land use planning, will bring a superior level of performance and service in planning and development,” Voegele said. “Our quality of life is not for sale, and I will be holding Planning and Development to the highest standard in maintaining that pledge to our community.”

Since leaving Oldham County in 2003, Mr. Urban worked in the private sector and was director of planning for the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana. He is a graduate of the University of Massachusetts and has a Master’s Degree from the University of Massachusetts in Land Use Planning and Landscape Design.

OLDHAM CIRCUIT COURT ISSUES DECISION OF BRENTWOOD SUBDIVISION

2010-11-04T21:23:00.000-04:00

On June 24, 2008 the Oldham Planning and Development Commission (PDC) denied an application made by Oldham Farms Development, LLC for approval of Brentwood Subdivision. Oldham Farms Development, LLC then appealed that decision to the Oldham Circuit Court. An Agreed Order was thereafter entered that dismissed the lawsuit.

As a result of the Agreed Order the PDC held meetings on July 25, 2008 and on September 1, 2008 to discuss the subdivision plan again. The meeting on September 1, 2008 was conducted in a closed session which means that the public was not allowed to view the proceedings. After coming out of the closed session the PDC voted to approve the Brentwood subdivision plans, thereby, overturning the original denial of the plans by that same body. Subsequent to that decision Steve Harold, ET. Al (Other private individuals) filed a lawsuit alleging that the Commission abused its authority by approving the subdivision plans because it feared that it would be sued. Apparently someone had threatened to sue the PDC if they did not approve the subdivision plans. The plaintiffs alleged that it was a violation of law to approve the subdivision plans on the basis that the Commission feared a lawsuit. Judge Conrad found that the approval of the subdivision plans because of fear of litigation does not invalidate the approval.

Personally, I find that the approval of subdivision plans because the PDC feared litigation to be abhorrent even though it might not be illegal. If the Commission were to continue making decisions on that basis, a person would simply just have to threaten the Commission with litigation and the Commission would capitulate. That would result in a totally ineffective Commission. Nonetheless, the court ruled that the fear of litigation did not negate the decision of the Commission.

However, the Circuit Court did find that the Plaintiffs’ (Steve Harold, ET.AL) due process rights were violated when the PDC failed to properly advertise the PDC meeting on July 25, 2008 during which the subdivision plans were discussed prior to the September 1, 2008 decision to approve the subdivision plans. As a result of finding that the meeting was not properly advertised any business conducted at the meeting is null and void. The court then ordered and adjudged that the PDC final approval of the Brentwood Subdivision plans be set aside and the matter remanded for further proceedings before the PDC. The decision of the Circuit Court contains other legal discussions but as stated essentially it is back to the drawing board for the subdivision plans and back to the PDC.

As a result of the decision Michael Tigue, Attorney for the plaintiffs sent an email to all of the Oldham County magistrates, the county Judge/Executive, Courtney Baxter, the County Attorney and Stuart Ulferts, the Attorney for the PDC. The body of that email follows:

Dear Judge Executive Murner and Magistrates:

Attached is a copy of J. Conrad’s decision in the Brentwood subdivision appeal.

J. Conrad has determined that the Planning Commission’s second decision purportedly approving the Brentwood plan is void because it violated my clients’ rights to due process of law.

As you know the only decision that remains of record is the original decision denying the plan which is also not appealable as it was dismissed quite some time ago. Which means, all the work that has been completed on the site as of today has been performed in clear violation of the law.

As such, I have previously requested that orders issue immediately closing all roadways within the property to prevent them from being used by the public as well as stopping all work activity on the site which continues to this day despite J. Conrad’s Order. I have also requested that the developer be directed to take immediate action to physically prevent the roadways from being used by the public. My prior communications were sent to Ms. Beth Stuber, Mr. Brian Davis and their counsel Stuart Ulferts, Esq. At present, the public is using the roadways to cut through my clients neighborhoods often at high rates of speed. When blockades have been put up, people are simply moving them as well which means the developers need to be directed to put up barricades that cannot be moved and to erect signs that warn the public the roadways are not open to ensure their safety.

I also understand the roadways have been dedicated as county public roads. That dedication was awfully short-sighted as it is now apparent that the dedication is invalid as a matter of law well. The simple fact is that public roads are required by statute to be created by record plat. In this instance, they were dedicated pursuant to a plat that was denied. The subsequent approval of that plat has now been thrown out. In short, the dedication of the property’s roadways is void.

This situation is an unmitigated disaster brought on by an arrogant refusal of the development group to comply with, or at least respect the law. Had they simply waited (at a minimum out of respect) for the judicial system to resolve this dispute all of this could have avoided. It is truly unfortunate that this development group has placed Oldham County and my clients in general in this position. Obviously, some very difficult decisions are going to have to be made. Nevertheless, the illegal site development now has to be addressed and my clients expect it to be addressed promptly.

Moreover, the Brentwood Plan is not subject to further review as last proposed. That Plan was denied. That decision is not subject to further review as it was dismissed by prior Court Order. The only option Oldham County has is to direct the developer to resubmit a subdivision plan application for a substantially different proposal provided the requisite period to resubmit has elapsed.

Further, even if the same plan is resubmitted it directly violates the following regulations Sections 5.3A; 5.3.B.3; 5.3.B.4; 5.3.C; 5.3.3(a); 5.3.C.3(c); 7.1.C; 7.2.D.4; 7.2.F. In short, there are no circumstance by which the plan can be approved.

Regardless, what’s on the ground today is illegal and your assistance in remedying the problems it creates is greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Michael Tigue

I do not know what the final result of all of this litigation will be but I believe that all work should be stopped until a final decision can be reached. However, I have seen Judge Murner be slow to follow the orders of Judge Karen Conrad before and I have heard him say that he would go to jail if he thought that the court was wrong before he would obey an order of the court. I would believe that failure of the county to stop the work on the subdivision would result in more litigation for the county and we already have enough liability in pending court actions. We certainly do not need more.

SPARKS BELIEVES WATCHDOG IS SCHOOLYARD BULLY

2010-11-03T20:23:00.001-04:00

According to JD Sparks I am a “schoolyard bully.” At least that is what he told reporter Andrea Uhde Shepard of the Louisville Courier-Journal. I wonder what he would consider himself after the physical altercation he got into at a May 2009 Lincoln dinner in Jefferson County after which he had to get an attorney to keep from going to jail on felony charges. He later plead guilty to disorderly conduct.

The person that Sparks assaulted was Jonathan Meador, a reporter with the Louisville news outlet “LEO.” Meador referred to Sparks as “a known criminal with serious boundary issues and a short temper.” Perhaps I’ll grow up to be a “known criminal” some day. Surely, I should aspire to get out of the schoolyard.

JD Sparks wouldn’t bully anyone; he would let someone else do it for him. He was aware that I had the sound bites about Anne Gernstein and begged me not to play them before the November 2, 2010 elections. He said that he had been assured that someone at the state level of the Republican Party would get Gernstein out of her current position as chairwoman of the Oldham county GOP after the November elections. He wanted someone else to do the heavy lifting. He was simply not up for the job.

Needless to say, Sparks really became angry at me when he heard the first sound bite about him. He told me that I was “ruining his political career.” The fact is that he has not started his career yet but I don’t believe he will need any help from me in ruining his political carer. If having been a marine and wearing tattoos makes one a good politician, then Sparks will be a success. On the other hand, if knowing the issues, using good judgment, and representing the people make you a success, I don’t believe that he will measure up.

The only thing that I can say with certainty is that he will be noticed and heard more on the Oldham County Fiscal Court than his predecessor, Iva Davis. . When she was campaigning she gave Sparks a pass on his incident at the May 2009 Lincoln Dinner. Unfortunately, I will not be so kind. After all, I am the schoolyard bully.

For Sparks to infer in any way that Gernstein’s remarks about people would have been appropriate if placed in the context in which they were made is absurd. Just how does he explain me taking her comments about him being feminine and possibly homosexual as being out of context? Her remarks cannot be condoned and that is not good judgment by Sparks. Strike one!

This is a good time to review the Gernstein sound bites about Sparks. I have combined them here. I do not believe taht the bites could be put into any context that would change what Gernstein is saying. Sparks' beef should be with the creator of the message-not the messenger.

COULD THIS BE WHY PAULA GISH IS NOT THE COUNTY JUDGE ELECT

2010-11-01T11:50:00.001-04:00

Anne Gernstein is obviously not impressed with Paula Gish. Perhaps longer meetings might shed more light on what is going on behind the scenes. And, then again, maybe not.

REVIEW OF COUNTY ATTORNEY AND DISTRICT JUDGE RACES

2010-11-01T11:36:00.000-04:00

Who do you vote for in these races? This year that is a very difficult question to answer. First, one must decide what is important to him/her. Is experience the most important factor that you consider? Is integrity more important than experience? What about qualifications or political party? Then there is always the question of the candidate being a conservative, moderate or liberal.

In the race for District Judge you have Jerry Crosby, the incumbent, who has been the District Judge for many years while his opponent, John Shaughnessey, has never been a judge at any level. If experience is the most important factor to the voter, Crosby wins, hands down. However, let me caution voters who simply consider experience. If experience were the only factor considered, the incumbent would almost always win as the incumbent usually has the most experience.

Both candidates for District Judge have stated that they are not allowed to express their political views or how they would vote on hypothetical cases. Thus, it is very difficult to know if the candidate is conservative, moderate or liberal. If you have followed the rulings of Judge Crosby, you may be able to make that determination. However, very few people even know what a District Judge does, much less know how the judge rules.

I have listened to both candidates speak on more than one occasion and the only thing that I am certain of is that Judge Crosby has the most experience. Naturally he has made a point of making sure that the people are aware of his experience. On the other hand, Shaughnessey has served in the military and belonged to several patriotic organizations. Therefore, he champions himself as a patriot. However, he has never inferred that Crosby is not loyal to his country. The voters have a tough decision to make and very little information on which to base the decision.

In the race for County Attorney we have a different situation. We have one candidate, John Carter, who seems to have the most experience since he was a District Judge for about ten years. Many people would believe that as a result of having been a District Judge the experience gained from that position would make him the most qualified. That is not necessarily true. Certainly that experience helps him. However, in that position he only made decisions on cases that came before him. There is a lot that happens to a case before it reaches the District Judge. As a matter of fact many cases never reach the District Judge. The County Attorney can decide to not take the case to trial or an agreement between the aggrieved parties can be reached without going to court. In one his speeches District Judge Crosby made the statement that the County Attorney had more responsibility for enforcement of the law than the District Judge. Thus while experience as a District Judge is important it is not to be confused with experience as a County Attorney. It is also important to mention that the County Attorney has one major function that does not involve going to District or Circuit Court and that is the responsibility for advising the Fiscal Court.

The only candidate who has any experience as a County Attorney is Stuart Ulferts. He was an Assistant County Attorney for a period of four years. Additionally, he has been employed as an attorney for the Planning and Development Commission for almost four years. Thus, Ulferts is the only candidate who has actually made the decisions that a County Attorney is required to make.

The third candidate, Galen Clark, is the only person who has run for the position of County Attorney and he has done that twice. He narrowly lost to long time incumbent, John Fendley, in the 2010 Republican primary race and he also lost the same race in 2006. Although he did not win either race the public has had opportunities to learn a great deal about him and many have already voiced their approval for him. However, Clark is running as a “write-in” candidate and it is very difficult to win as a “write-in” candidate. Moreover, he did not enter the race until very late in the election cycle. He would have been well advised to have entered the race the day after the executive committee of the Oldham county Republican party shunned him when picking a replacement for the late John Fendley on the Republican ticket.

To my knowledge, Clark is the only candidate that has experience practicing law in a state other than Kentucky. While some people have criticized Clark for having practiced in Indiana I find that to be a plus for him. That is experience that the other candidates do not have.

The race for County Attorney has been the most negative race that I have seen in Oldham County for many years. Allegations have been made against John Carter that his judgment should be questioned because of an incident in which he fired shots into a neighbor’s house after having consumed alcohol. However, the neighbor did not file a complaint against Carter and he was not charged with any violations.

Then there have been the people who have said that Galen Clark does not have any experience in Oldham County; that his experience comes from Jefferson County and Indiana. First, that is not true, Clark has had cases in Oldham courts. If it were true, it is simply ludicrous as the law in Jefferson County is much the same as the law in Oldham County. Both counties come under the umbrella of the Kentucky Constitution as well as the Kentucky Revised Statutes. That is simply someone grasping for straws.

Finally, there are those people, mostly John Carter supporters, who want to pick at Stuart Ulferts’ selection for his spouse. Frankly, I don’t care who he selected for a spouse nor do I care who anyone else chooses for his/her spouse. I do not believe that anyone would want people to berate them for their choice of a spouse. That is really throwing dirt. I know many spouses of politicians whom I could rip apart. I won’t go there.

For certain there are some sour grapes in this election. Those sour grapes are certain to remain until the 2014 elections. However, people must make a selection on Tuesday. For the sake of Oldham County I hope they make the right choice.

As you have noticed, I have not endorsed any of these candidates. Frankly, the variables are such in these races that I do not believe that it would be fair for me to advise people to vote for any specific person. It simply depends on what is important to the individual voter.

WHY ERNIE HARRIS WILL EASILY WIN KENTUCKY STATE SENATE RACE ON TUESDAY

2010-11-01T11:35:00.003-04:00

Guest Column: By Scott M. Davis

In reviewing one of Oldham County’s most interesting races on the ballot this coming Tuesday, it is easy to see that State Senator Ernie Harris is likely to win a commanding victory over John Black for the Kentucky State Senate seat covering Oldham, Henry, Carroll, Trimble, and eastern Jefferson County. A brief look at the situation surrounding this race gives meaningful insight into how this race is easy to call before the ballot box opens on Tuesday.

First, Democrat John Black has employed many of the same campaign strategies which his brother-in-law, Republican David Voegele, used in his primary campaign for Judge-Executive earlier this year. This includes many large signs with various slogans strategically placed around Oldham County. Black has changed the message on many of his signs throughout the campaign, thus employing the same tactic used by Voegele. Additionally, Black has been seen in many parts of Oldham County campaigning around major intersections waving to people as they drive by.

What is important to remember is while Voegele’s campaign was successful using these tactics, this is a much different race. Ernie Harris is not Paula Gish, in any way, shape, or form. Ernie Harris is a legitimate candidate with a proven track record. Ernie Harris has not beat himself, unlike Gish. What was evident in the County-Judge Executive primary was that many people voted against Paula Gish, rather than for David Voegele. Additionally, the straight Republican ticket voters throughout Oldham County are going to come out in force, especially considering the vast popularity of Dr. Rand Paul in the U.S. Senate Race. Furthermore, the Republican tidal wave brought on by the tea party and the abysmal popularity of Democrats in general at this point will also play a major factor. None of this bolds well for Black come Tuesday evening.

John Black has also focused a significant part of his campaign on supporting expanded gambling at Kentucky’s horse racing tracks. We don’t have to debate the point that this is not a popular position with the majority of Oldham County voters, or voters throughout the commonwealth for that matter as witnessed by recent special elections. What is most interesting is that Black has not received any significant amount of financial support from the racing industry, especially when compared to the amounts of money they have put behind other Democratic State Senate Candidates in other recent elections. Why has Black campaigned on this unpopular issue when he has not received significant backing from the industry? Is he really just not invited to the party?

Ernie Harris on the other hand has typically kept his commitments to the voters of Oldham County and has supported the Republican majority leadership in the State Senate. He has given the voters no significant reason to fire him from the position he has held for several terms. His prominent committee appointments in the State Senate are also beneficial to Oldham County in terms of returning money back to our county for many various needs.

So there you have it, an easy win for Senator Ernie Harris is the call for Tuesday night.

WINTERS FOR PROPERTY VALUATION ADMINISTRATOR

2010-11-01T11:35:00.002-04:00

Ron Winters is my choice for PVA. Winters has the experience necessary to do the job. Additionally he has proven to be fair and to perform the duties of the office in accordance with the constitution of Kentucky.

VOTE FOR BOB LESLIE FOR THIRD DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

2010-10-30T21:07:00.000-04:00

For me, endorsing Bob Leslie is a very simple task. Leslie has kept his word to his constituents. He has voted as he said he would. The fact that he has stated that he will not vote for any tax increases is very important. Further, I have never found Leslie to be anything other than honest with me or anyone else.

COULD IT BE THAT GERNSTEIN AND BARR ARE NO LONGER FRIENDS

2010-10-25T21:51:00.001-04:00

It is apparent that Anne Gernstein seemed to be stressed at the time of the Lincoln Dinner in 2010. If she were not stressed, she was just plain angry with Julie Barr and the office of Congressman Geoff Davis.

Anne has really laid one on Julie Barr with this comment. With the election coming next Tuesday Gernstein and Barr will be working together to count the absentee ballots and performing other duties that members of the Oldham County Election Board perform on election day. (Both Gernstein and Barr are members of the board) There is bound to be some tension.

At least they won't have to pretend that they love each other. Their cards have been put on the table for everyone to see.

Once again people, this is the chairperson of your Republican party. If this is what you want, it is your choice. I just want everyone to know. I don't want someone to say he/she was not aware of the situation.

GERNSTEIN ON JD SPARKS AGAIN

2010-10-24T22:42:00.001-04:00

I don't believe that this sound bite needs any explanation. When you start making assumptions about people you are treading on dangerous ground!

HOW TO VOTE FOR COUNTY JUDGE

2010-10-21T23:07:00.001-04:00

<> <>

Anne Gernstein didn't see all of the county political races as being an easy decision. However, you gotta do what ya gotta do. Did she think that she was going to cast her vote at the office of the County Clerk? Is that why she thought that she had to hold her nose?

ANNE GERNSTEIN ON ANIMALS IN THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE-AGAIN

2010-10-19T22:06:00.000-04:00

I was asked by someone why I had taken this sound bite off the web site. Frankly, I don't know how it was removed but here it is again.

ANNE GERNSTEIN TIRES OF GEOFF DAVIS' OFFICE

2010-10-19T09:27:00.001-04:00

<> <>

Apparently the 2010 Oldham County republican Lincoln dinner was popular this past spring as the office of Congressman Geoff Davis almost did not get all of the seats that the office wanted. Perhaps Anne Gernstein's patience was wearing thin but it is obvious that she was tiring of their last minute reservations.

Later we will learn that Julie Barr, Oldham County Clerk, almost missed the dinner also.

LAGRANGE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR EACH WIN PART OF COURT OF APPEALS DECISION

2010-10-18T11:18:00.000-04:00

On December 4, 2008 LaGrange Mayor Elsie Carter brought claims against the LaGrange City Council in Oldham Circuit Court. Mayor Carter alleged that the Council had acted contrary to law by approving Graham Whatley as the City Attorney for LaGrange and subsequently rescinding that approval. She further alleged that the Council violated the law by reducing the property tax rate during the tax year which created a budget deficit.

Regarding the appointment of Graham Whatley as City Attorney, the Council contended that his appointment was conditional and that prior to all of the conditions being met the Council decided to rescind the appointment.

In June 2009 the Oldham Circuit Court found in favor of Mayor Carter on both issues. The City Council appealed that decision. On October 15, 2010 the Court of Appeals for the Commonwealth of Kentucky affirmed the decision of the Oldham Circuit regarding the changing of the tax rate. In the decision, the court found that the reduction of the tax rate was in violation of statutory authority.

On the other hand, regarding the appointment of Graham Whatley as the City Attorney and the subsequent action to rescind the appointment, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Oldham Circuit Court. In essence, the Court of Appeals found that the Council had the authority to rescind the appointment at any time up to the point that all of the conditions of the appointment had been met.
City Councilman Jason Taylor stated “It is now time for Graham Whatley to step aside, as he has never been a valid city attorney. It is unfortunate that Mayor Carter has caused taxpayer money to be spent on this unnecessary and meritless lawsuit. I suggest that Graham Whatley reimburse to the city every dime that he has been paid to him by Mayor Carter, and that such funds be given back to the taxpayers.” He also stated that he thought that the Council should not pay any more money to Graham Whatley for services after the date of the decision, October 15, 2010.

Mayor Elsie Carter stated that she had not discussed the decision with her attorney but that there was a good possibility that she would appeal the decision.

ANNE GERNSTEIN EVALUATES RICK RASH

2010-10-14T22:53:00.001-04:00

I certainly hope that Rick Rash has broad shoulders. Anne Gernstein seems to be on them all of the time.

WATCHDOG ENDORSES ERNIE HARRIS FOR STATE SENATOR

2010-10-13T11:17:00.000-04:00

This is my first endorsement for the general election for 2010. Actually the endorsement is easy.

Senator Ernie Harris has served Senate district 26 well for seventeen years. I have not agreed with all of his votes but overall he has followed the will of his constituents. In essence, he has done what he has said he would so.

On the other hand, John Black, while serving as Judge/Executive of Oldham County, did not always follow the will of the residents. Many times it is difficult to know what the will of the people is. However, when Dynegy was coming to Oldham County it was abundantly clear that the people did not want it. Whether it has been good for Oldham County or not is not at issue. The people did not want it and John Black paid the political price for neglecting the will of the people.

Further, John Black’s campaign seems to be based on a single issue and that is doing what he considers to be best for the horse industry. Indeed, many of his supporters are from the route 42 corridor. I agree that the horse industry should normally be supported but in this case that simply translates to supporting gambling. Oldham County is about more than gambling and the horse industry.

Other than the horse industry Black’s biggest contributor is developer Bob Jones who contributed $500 to his campaign. If you have followed this blog, you know that I certainly do not consider that a plus for him.

It appears to me that John Black’s support base is narrow while Harris seems to be supported by a broad cross section of people from within the 26th senatorial district.

Several months ago I said on this site that I did not see anyone on the horizon that I thought would be better than Ernie Harris. I have not changed my mind.

WHEN COMMENTING ON SHERIFF SPARROW'S POSITION ON THE COUNTY JUDGE PRIMARY RACE GERNSTEIN HAS HER OWN OPINION

2010-10-11T16:07:00.001-04:00

FINANCIAL REPORTS OF COUNTY ATTORNEY CANDIDATES

2010-10-11T15:58:00.000-04:00

The 32 day pre-election campaign reports are due so I thought that this would be a good time to review the finances of the three candidates who are running for County Attorney. Actually the review is simple. Due to the timing of Galen Clark’s filing for the office he had not taken in any contributions and has not spent any monies as his report reflects. Stuart Ulferts has no report on file-at least the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance web site states that there is no report on file. Due to the signs that I have seen it appears that he has spent some money.

Now the report of John Carter gives rise to some interesting observations and possibilities. His report reflects that he has received $27,849 and has spent $23,051.05. Thus, he has a balance of $4,797.95.

If you remember, the Fendley family did not want Galen Clark to be the County Attorney because he had not practiced law in Oldham County. Well, of Carter’s total receipts he has contributed $23,000 to his own campaign. Thus, other contributors have only contributed $4,849 to him. Other than himself, Carter has had thirty contributors. Of those nineteen are attorneys. Of the nineteen attorneys only one has an office in Oldham County. The others have offices in Louisville with one exception and that is Martin Johnstone. He is on the Supreme Court. Carter’s biggest donor is none other than Barbara Fendley. Thus, the majority of Carter’s support comes from outside Oldham County.

Barbara Fendley made a phone call to Anne Gernstein shortly after her husband’s demise. Do you think that her husband’s replacement as the Republican nominee for the November election might have been discussed? Again, the Fendleys thought that Galen Clark should not be the Republican nominee because he did not practice in Oldham County. Considering Carters supporters, it appears that if he is elected, there will be a lot of Louisville influence in Oldham County. Further, John Carter served as a District Judge in Jefferson County-not in Oldham County.

Personally, I don’t believe that it matters that Clark did not practice in Oldham County. What matters is his qualifications and whether he has the same values as most of the people in Oldham County have.

STATE OF THE OLDHAM COUNTY GOP

2010-10-08T23:57:00.001-04:00

By: Oldham County Magistrate Scott Davis

As many of the regular readers of the blog can attest to, there is a serious problem with the leadership of the Oldham County GOP, specifically with the Chairperson Anne Gernstein. I have been active in the political scene of Oldham County for nearly five years now and during that time I have rarely experienced a time when Anne Gernstein was not dividing the party, rather than uniting and moving it forward. To speak frankly, in my opinion saying that Anne Gernstein’s leadership has been abysmal would be an understatement. Nonexistent would be a much more accurate description.

I have spoken to countless people around Oldham County and the consensus is very clear that Anne Gernstein is destroying the Oldham County GOP. Her actions as Chairperson are hardly what one would usually expect from a party leader. To begin with, saying that Anne Gernstein “speaks like a sailor” would be a slap in the face to sailors, as the lewd language and disgraceful way in which she has spoken about nearly every elected Republican official in Oldham County is unacceptable. Anne Gernstein thrives on gossiping and belittling Republicans throughout Oldham County. Furthermore, in my opinion, she also seems to have a serious problem with other women being in positions of power, based upon her obvious disdain for women such as Mary Ellen Kinser, Paula Gish, and Julie Barr.

As many Republicans who are seeking office for the first time have found out over the years, Anne Gernstein is known for “blacklisting” anyone who decides to run for office that doesn’t “approach her throne” and ask for permission and her stamp of approval to seek the office. This happened to me and at least four other first-time Republican candidates for office in the last five years. Even sadder is that fact that others who have spoken with her prior to filing for elective office were typically discouraged and told of the many reasons “why they could never win”.

Anne Gernstein is also known for choosing sides in local primary elections here in Oldham County. What kind of a party leader engages in such practices? She openly worked for and supported Duane Murner in his candidacy for Judge-Executive, even though there were other candidates, including a sitting Republican Judge-Executive. Another issue that I have discussed with several people is that fact that Anne Gernstein operates the Republican headquarters from a leased space in LaGrange with a sign over the office encouraging people to vote for Duane Murner as Judge-Executive. This sign has been in place for approximately five years now. Anne has told me personally that Howard Ferrell, the owner of the building, put the sign up. However, if she were so opposed to its placement, why hasn’t she moved to a new location over the last five years?

Another interesting topic is how Anne Gernstein appropriates the funding received by the local GOP through donations and attendance at the annual Lincoln dinner. To the best of my knowledge, a large percentage of this money goes directly to her, solely at her discretion for various “expenses”. I have yet to see one dime of money spent to support local Republicans running in contested races. Many other counties spend donated funds to back Republicans in contested races, why not Anne Gernstein and our local GOP? Even more disappointing is that Anne has worked far more for candidates OUTSIDE of Oldham County, such as Marcus Carey and Mike Sodrel, than local Republicans. She also chose to support Tray Grayson in the U.S. Senate Primary earlier this year and in my opinion has done very little to support Rand Paul in his race against Jack Conway. This is quite simply unacceptable.

The final straw with many local Republicans concerning Anne Gernstein was her abysmal handling of the nomination process to replace the deceased County Attorney John Fendley. While she had more than sufficient time to interview candidates, she chose not to do so. Instead, she spent her time soliciting John Carter to submit his name as a candidate. There were other candidates who also submitted their names for consideration, including Galen Clark who lost the May primary by less than 200 votes to John Fendley. Anne Gernstein’s disdain for Mr. Clark is so prevalent that she never considered him for the nomination, as evidenced by the sound byte recently heard on this site. She even went as far as to mock County Judge-Executive Duane Murner because in her words, he wanted Courtney Baxter nominated. Anne Gernstein could care less what the Republicans of Oldham County want, as evidenced by her complete slap in their face for not giving Galen Clark fair consideration for the nomination. Mr. Clark is a man who has run for the office twice previously, unlike Mr. Carter who has never run for the position previously. Now, Anne is working feverishly to help Mr. Carter get elected in an effort to save what little face she might have left. If you look at her car, the only Republican candidate in the county who she will display magnetic signs for is John Carter, even though there are several other contested local races. Way to go Anne in supporting all local candidates!

It is clear that Anne Gernstein has likely alienated herself with nearly every office within Oldham County by her badmouthing of elected Republicans who run them. This includes the County Clerk, Sheriff, Judge-Executive, and the Fiscal Court Magistrates. Additionally, she has lied in some of her statements about various officials, including Magistrate Rick Rash. As for others, the vicious rumors which Anne Gernstein spreads around the county have been damaging and are totally unnecessary.

I have been informed that several of the larger annual donors to the local GOP are withdrawing their support until Anne Gernstein steps aside or is removed. I applaud each of them for this. There is no way in my opinion for her to ever regain any shred of respect necessary to effectively operate in her position. It is time that she does the right thing for once and step aside. She has devastated the local party unity enough already.

BAXTER NEEDS TO STOP THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

2010-10-06T14:04:00.003-04:00

Daniel Fendley, Assistant Oldham County Attorney under Courtney Baxter, has now filed new evidence with the Oldham Circuit Court in the case of COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY vs JASON PARRISH. For another article on this matter visit examiner.com .

The purpose of this article is not to belabor the point of whether Stuart Ulferts is guilty of misconduct or not but to point out a conflict of interest that obviously exists in the County Attorney office. Daniel Fendley is the son of the late County Attorney, John Fendley. Since Fendley's death it has become obvious that the Fendleys do not want any of John Fendley's former opponent's to have the office of County Attorney. To me it appears that they believe that they should be the people to determine who who holds that office.

Remarks made by one of the Fendley children at their father's funeral indicated that the people in power should not allow his primary opponent have the office. Now the Fendley family appears to be attempting to keep the other person who was in the May primary, Stuart Ulferts, from having the position. Why don't they just allow the public to make that determination? I liked John Fendley and respected him for his willingness to be forthright even though I frequently disagreed with him. Somehow I just don't believe that he would have condoned what has happened. Can't everyone just let him rest in peace?

Ulferts may be guilty of misconduct and if he is, he should be punished for that. However, given the history of this political race Daniel Fendley's involvement in any filings regarding Ulferts is clearly a conflict of interest and should not be allowed to continue.

This latest action by Fendley simply adds another chapter to a political race that has become a joke. Further, for Fendley to use the court system to attack Ulferts when he has more than a legal interest in the case, serves only for the public to lose confidence in the judicial system.

One other interesting piece of information is brought forth from the motion filed by Daniel Fendley. In the Motion he states that Stuart Ulferts signed a contract on August 28,2006 to become a civil attorney for the county and that a mere seven days later he, Daniel Fendley, signed a contract to go to work for his father in the County Attorney's office as an assistant County Attorney. I believe that Ulferts had been working in the County Attorney's office prior to accepting employment with the county-specifically with the Planning and Development Commission. Is it possible that Ulferts was dismissed from his position in the County Attorney's office by John Fendley in order that he could replace him with his son, Daniel Fendley? Certainly is something worth thinking about.

By the way, I attended the forum last Thursday for those seeking political office. I could not help but notice that Daniel Fendley was seated with John Carter, Stuart Ulfert's opponent for the office of County Attorney. The seating was not assigned. Thus, attendees could sit at any place of their choice.

I am sure that this race will produce more newsworthy items before November 2, 2010.

ANNE GERNSTEIN REBUKES DUANE MURNER

2010-10-05T02:43:00.001-04:00

Anne Gernstein apparently was very unhappy that County Judge/Executive Duane Murner did not consult with her regarding his selection to fill the interim County Attorney position. Thus, she chose to be spiteful and not consult with him on the selection of a person to replace John Fendley on the November ballot.

The problem is that with both Gernstein and Murner wanting their way, the people of Oldham County became the loser in the selection process. This is especially true for Galen Clark who had nearly won the May 2010 Republican primary. As a result of all of the posturing by Gernstein and Murner, Clark apparently did not receive proper consideration. From comments made by Gernstein and aired on this blog, it is obvious that she was not going to consider Clark. It is now obvious that Murner did not consider Clark for the interim position either. Both already had someone in mind for their respective selection. Gernstein and the executive committee of the GOP had the time to conduct interviews but did not do so.

Had interviews been conducted the information regarding John Carter’s shooting incident may have come to light and could have been considered. Also, I do not believe that Murner conducted any interviews of prospective candidates for the interim position of County Attorney.

Keep in mind that when Murner appointed Courtney Baxter to the interim County Attorney position he stated that he was appointing her to keep politics out of the selection, thereby insinuating that she would not be seeking the position on the November ballot. It is now apparent that he was less than candid with those remarks. His term cannot end too soon. I am sure that if he were confronted with this, he would give his usual “deer in the headlights” look as though he didn’t know what you were talking about. The people have become accustomed to that look.

There was nothing illegal done by Duane Murner or Anne Gernstein but their actions reflect deceitful behavior and should not be tolerated. Once again, Anne Gernstein should step aside as chairperson of the Oldham County Republican Party. She has alienated so many people that she cannot be an effective leader.

IS GERNSTEIN SUGGESTING THAT WE NEED A COUNTY DRESS CODE

2010-10-02T17:29:00.001-04:00

Not being Catholic I have never paid much attention to people in offices who all appear to be dressing in unison. As a matter of fact, having been in the military and in the United States Border Patrol I became accustomed to seeing people dressed alike. However, some people must not like to see people dressed alike - especially in a business setting. My only concern would be if I were an employee of the office. If I were being told to wear a uniform, I would expect my employer to purchase my clothing for me. After all, the clothing probably would not be something that I would wear otherwise. Also, some people like to wear a particular style of clothing that is becoming to them and most uniforms do not flattler a person.

That said, I have not noticed that the work product of the County Clerk's office has been affected by the uniform dress code that is apparently in existence. I have heard that some of the employees are not thrilled by having to wear clothing that is similar to all of the other employees.

Now as to the physical aspects of the employees, I would not dare go there. I learned a long time ago that the best thing to say about a woman is that she looks nice. I will leave it at that.

RASH MAKES ANOTHER LIST

2010-09-29T17:15:00.002-04:00

Magistrate Rick Rash has achieved another high level position in the Oldham County GOP. From listening to the recent sound bites and knowing what lies ahead I suspect taht he will have many contenders for his exalted position. As a matter of fact I suspect that I am challenging Rash for the number one spot. From what I have heard I suspect that Gernstein has also made the top of other people's lists

OC SHERIFF'S OFFICE RESPONDS TO JOHN CARTER REMARKS TO COURIER JOURNAL

2010-09-26T22:23:00.003-04:00

In a memorandum addressed to County Judge Duane Murner on September 23, 2010, Chief Oldham County Deputy Sheriff Bob Noble makes it clear that he does not agree with the remarks made by County Attorney candidate John Carter. The "watchdog" obtained the memorandum via a request filed under the Kentucky Open Records law. The memorandum details the shooting incident of May 10, 2009 that was reported earlier on this site. An earlier memorandum addressed the incident but did not go into detail about the incident. In that memorandum Deputy Sheriff John Schulte simply stated that Carter had been target shooting in his back yard and fired several rounds that struck his neighbor's home but was not charged in the incident because Carter and the neighbor agreed that Carter would pay for the damages.

In the September 22, 2010 edition of the Louisvile Courier Journal Carter said that the incident was brought up for political reasons and that his opponent, Democrat Stuart Ulferts, had used his role as an attorney working for the county to get the Sheriff's office to write a synopsis of the incident.In Chief Deputy Bob Noble's memorandum he states that Carter's remarks regarding the initiation of the first synopsis are a "complete misrepresentation of the facts surrrounding the report." Noble further stated that sometime in August (2010) the sheriff's office began receiving inquiries regarding the incident, including one from Stuart Ulferts. However, he stated that when Ulferts was first told that there was no report made of the incident because the issue had been settled, Ulferts made no further inquiry "nor did he ask for or in any way attempt to influence the Oldham Sheriff's Office to generate a report." Noble stated that he believed that the incident was going to become an issue.Thus,he instructed Deputy Schulte to submit a "brief" synopsis of the incident. Noble stated that Mr. Carter's campaign received the first copy of the report. Noble stated that had Mr. Carter chosen to respond to law enforcement honestly and in a civil manner, this would not have been an issue and as the perpetrator, he is solely responsible for any issues arising therefrom.

Carter claimed to the Courier Journal that he had not been drinking when he was shooting. Carter also stated to me that he had not been drinking even though a bottle of wine was present along with a pistol. The presence of the pistol and the wine were referenced in the memorandum prepared by Dupty Schulte. However, Shulte did not elaborate of Mr. Carter's reaction to the arrival of police on the scene. Schulte also did not the issue of Carter's sobriety.

Contrary to what Carter told me and the Courier Journal, the memorandum of Chief Deputy Noble states that when Deputy Schulte initially made contact with Carter after the shooting incident Carter lied by stating that he knew nothing about shots being fired. Noble further stated that, according to Deputy Schulte, Carter also appeared to be intoxicated. Also, according to the Noble memo, when Deputy Schulte went toward the pistol Carter attempted to physically block him. Due to a gun and alcohol being involved and the belligerence displayed by Mr. Carter he was handcuffed for safety reasons.

This latest memorandum certainly puts a different light on the issue. Guns and alcohol certainly do not mix. As I stated in a previous article I gave Mr. Carter an opportunity to respond to the first article. He declined to do so and said that the incident happened. However, this latest information certainly begs for an answer from Mr. Carter as his response to the inquiry made by the Sheriff's office cries for an explanation as well as does the involvement of the alcohol. Again, I offer Mr. Carter the opportunity to provide me with a response and I will post that response on this site.

I have posted Mr. Noble's memorandum, in its entirety, on this site for readers to review. You may view the memo by clicking here.

I am sure that Oldham countians have not heard the last of this issue. This is a very serious matter considering the office that Mr. Carter is seeking. As a matter of fact, I have been hearing from good sources that Galen Clark is giving strong consideration to entering the November 2, 2010 election as a "write-in" candidate for the Office of County Attorney.

Write-in candidates typically have a difficult time of winning in general elections due to the people who vote a straight party ticket. However, this seems to be the year of maverick voters who are not happy with business as usual. At the very least his candidacy would likely affect the outcome of the election. It could even influence the races for other offices if people decided to go away from the straight party vote in order to write in Galen Clark's name. Once they stray from the straight party vote they might decide to vote for other people who are not in their party.

GERNSTEIN ON INCEST AT COUNTY GOVERNMENT OFFICE

2010-09-23T16:05:00.001-04:00

According to Anne Gernstein a couple of the girls who work in the office of the County Judge were very close to the Paula Gish campaign. It makes one wonder if they could possibly be loyal to David Voegele were he to keep them in his administration.
Gernstein did not mention the ladies by name but if you have kept up with the employment and contracts of the Murner administration, it is not difficult to determine their identity

GERNSTEIN DEFINES OLDHAM COUNTY CHAIN OF COMMAND

2010-09-20T17:08:00.000-04:00

Anne Gernstein, the GOP chairperson, has confirmed what many people have known for years: that the most powerful democrat in Oldham County, Bob Jones,runs the county even though the county is Republican by registration. The voters did vote for a change in the 2010 primary. Hopefully, David Voegele will produce that change. The question is, does Voegele have the fortitude to make the necessary changes? Another article will be forthcoming on that issue.

LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR JOHN CARTER

2010-09-20T15:48:00.000-04:00

Recently I was provided a memorandun by written by an Oldham County Sheriff's deputy regarding an incident that involved John Carter who is the Republican candidate for County Attorney. I posted that memorandum on this site for the public to view. At that time Carter avised me that he had been furnished a letter from the neighbor involved in the incident. He told me that the letter indicated that the neighbor was going to support his candidacy. I advised him that if he would forward the letter to me, I would post it on this site.

Carter has furnished the letter to me and I have posted it here for everyone to view. Apparently the letter was originally directed to Andre Udhe, a reporter for the Louisville Courier Journal newspaper.

NEW INFORMATION ABOUT OLDHAMCOUNTY ATTORNEY CANDIDATE JOHN CARTER

2010-09-16T23:08:00.000-04:00

I have recently been provided a copy of a memorandum written by an Oldham County Deputy Sheriff in which he details an incident that he responded to. It is to be noted that the deputy prepared this memorandum fifteen months after the incident happened and it apparently is the only record of the incident. The subject of the incident was John Carter who is the Republican candidate for Oldham County Attorney.

In the memrandum the deputy states that John Carter was shooting at a trarget in his back yard and in doing so fired several rounds of ammunition that struck a neighbor's home. Carter and the neighbor came to an agreement whereby Carter would pay for the damages. Thus, no charges were filed against Carter. The deputy also stated that a bottle of wine was found with a gun in Carter's back yard.

This evening I had an opportunity to speak to John Carter about this incident and I asked him if it were true. He responded that he would respond as George Washington did when asked if he had chopped down a cherry tree. Carter stated,"I cannot tell a lie; it is true". He went on to say that he was not consuming alcohol at the time of the incident but he did not offer an explanation for the presence of the wine.

I offered Carter an opportunity to provide me with a written response which I said I would post on this site. He responded that he didn't feel that he could say anything else. He did state that he would provide a letter to me from his neighbor in which the neighbor states that she will support his candidacy for County Attorney. I told him that I would publish the letter when I receive it. Meanwhile, as I told Mr. Carter, I have posted the deputy's memorandum on this site. You can read the memorandum in its entirety by clicking here. You can then be your own judge regarding the incident.

WILL JD SPARKS BE A LOOSE CANNON

2010-09-16T16:01:00.001-04:00

I didn't want Magistrate Rick Rash to believe that he was the only politician that Anne Gerstein chose to villify from her throne at the GOP headquarters. So I decided that I would post her thoughts on JD Sparks who is the Republican nominee for magistrate for the 5th district. At the present time he has no opposition in the November 2010 general election

So, here you have it.

MAGISTRATE RICK RASH TO BE BARRED FROM GOP HEADQUARTERS

2010-09-15T20:53:00.001-04:00

What did Rick Rash do to get barred from the GOP headquarters? Perhaps the future will tell us something. I really thought that the GOP headquarters was/is an office open to the public but apparently the chairperson does what she wants. I don't know if he was ever refused entry to the headquarters or not but I thought that I had seen some of his campaign material at the office.

The other question that comes to mind is, did the position taken by the chairperson hurt Rash's quest to be reelected? He did lose by a small margin to another Republican.

Still a lot more coming.

ANNE GERNSTEIN: IN HER OWN WORDS ON GALEN CLARK

2010-09-09T17:38:00.003-04:00

You must adjust the volume on this bar to hear the audio. Sorry for the inconvenience.

TIME FOR A CHANGE IN OLDHAM COUNTY GOP LEADERSHIP

2010-09-09T17:21:00.002-04:00

Several weeks ago the Oldham County Republican Party had to select a nominee to replace former County Attorney John Fendley on the November 2010 ballot. John Fendley had defeated fellow Republican candidate Galen Clark by 199 votes in the May primary but subsequently was killed in a farm accident.

The chairperson of the Republican Party, Anne Gernstein, stated that the process for the selection would be similar to a corporate hire in the private sector. Thus, she advised that anyone interested in filling the position should submit a resume to her and each person would be considered by the executive committee of the party. Additionally, Gernstein personally asked John Carter to submit a resume. To my knowledge she did not ask anyone else to submit a resume. She did this despite the fact that he had never run for the position of County Attorney previously while Galen Clark had sought the nomination of the party on two previous occasions. In a sound bite that is on this site you can hear Gernstein state that she could never vote for Galen Clark. It is obvious to me that she had already determined who she wanted to be the person to replace John Fendley. She also stated to me that she had received a call from the widow of Fendley regarding the position. I believe that Anne Gernstein supplanted the will of the Republican voters of Oldham County and decided that she was better qualified to decide who should be the next Republican nominee for county attorney. That simply is not her job.

Meanwhile, Oldham County Judge Duane Murner had selected Courtney Baxter to complete the unexpired term of Fendley. At the time Murner announced the selection before the fiscal court he stated that he had selected Baxter in order to keep politics out of the process to replace Fendley on the ballot. Thus, people were led to believe that Baxter would not be a candidate for the position on the November ballot. However, Baxter did submit her resume to the GOP for consideration for the position. It is known that Gernstein was upset that Murner had not contacted her regarding his selection to complete Fendley’s unexpired term. On the other side of the coin, according to Gernstein, Murner was upset with her for not contacting him regarding the selection of the person to fill the position on the November ballot. This was evidenced by Murner’s obvious disdain for the selection process. He expressed his displeasure to the local media and stated that he would have nothing more to do with the Oldham County GOP. I doubt that he would have been happy with any process that did not lead to the selection of Courtney Baxter to fill the position on the November ballot, but that is just my opinion.

The fact is that the executive committee did not take the time to interview any of the candidates. Gernstein has stated that there was not enough time to conduct interviews of all of the candidates. There were four applicants for the position. I cannot believe that four hours could not have been given for the purpose of interviewing the applicants. If you aren’t interested in giving that much time to do a task, then don’t accept the challenge. Personally, I believe that Gernstein already had her mind made up and that she did not believe an interview with each applicant was necessary to fulfill her mission.

In Gernstein’s role as the chairperson of the GOP she is supposed to remain neutral in primary elections. There have been instances in the past when she did not do that. She has been partial to certain candidates. She was particularly partial to Duane Murner when he was running for County Judge in 2006. Now he is not happy with her methodology. My, how the worm turns! This site will show in the coming days and weeks that Gernstein used her position and the office of chairperson to vilify many of the candidates in Oldham County. This has brought about divisiveness with in the party. The county does not appear to be united at the present time. There is no doubt that Anne Gernstein has helped many people within the Oldham County republican party but the time has come for her to be replaced if the party is to become unified and continue to be successful. I believe that the people of Oldham County have lost trust in her judgment.

I believe that the Republican Party would have easily captured the position of County Attorney had John Fendley lived or had the selection process for his replacement been conducted more fairly. However, at the present time I do not believe that the election is a “slam dunk” for the Republicans. Other races might also be affected. Moreover, I suspect that funding for the Republican Party will decrease drastically if Gernstein remains as the chairperson. If that were to happen the party could become dysfunctional and serve no positive purpose. The Democrats in the county must be waiting anxiously to see what the outcome of this crisis is.

OC BOARD OF EDUCATION APPROVES TAX INCREASE

2010-08-27T00:51:00.006-04:00

On Thursday evening, August 26, 2010 the Oldham County Board of Education, as expected, voted to raise the property tax by 2 cents per hundred dollars valuation which amounts to a 2.99% increase in the property tax. Oldham County already had one of the highest property tax rates in the state.

The Board increased the tax rate despite having eight million dollars ($8,000,000) in the contingency fund. I expect that the board is in much better financial condition than the average family in Oldham County. But then the average family cannot just take money whenever it wants to do so.

Voting for the tax increase was Kevin Woosley, Joyce Fletcher, Larry Dodson, and Jennifer Jones. Opposing the tax increase was Walt Schumm. I find the votes of two of these members to be very interesting. Kevin Woosley’s wife, Melanie Woosley, is a member of the LaGrange City Council and recently opposed the budget presented to the council by LaGrange Mayor Elsie Carter. Melanie Woosley was in favor of a more conservative budget and in the past has voted to reduce taxes. Why then, would her husband want to raise the taxes of everyone in the county? My question is, does Melanie Woosley just want to give the Mayor grief or is Kevin Woosley afraid to stand up to the superintendent of the Oldham County school district, Paul Upchurch? I have been around the Woosleys at several city council meetings and have listened to both of them address the city council. I always believed that they spoke with virtually one voice.

Then we have Larry Dodson who at the time he ran for office stated to me that he was opposed to tax increases. He has even chastised the county fiscal court for raising fees and increasing the insurance premium tax. Don’t misunderstand me, I was opposed to all fee and tax increases but it just doesn’t seem right that Dodson was so critical of the fiscal court but did not seem to have a problem with raising the property tax rate for the schools.

It is not hard to understand why the members of the school board are not responsive to the public. There are two members up for reelection this year and both are unopposed. Frankly, the job pays next to nothing and carries a lot of responsibility. You would think though, that a county that prides itself in its education would be able to field some opposition to every incumbent. The real problem is that the people are happy as long as someone keeps telling them that they have the greatest school system in the state.

I have attended many school board meetings and it has always been obvious to me that the superintendent runs everything. That was also apparent at this meeting as the superintendent made the recommendation for the tax rate. I realize that a board hires someone to run the school system but the board is ultimately responsible for the actions of the superintendent.

Another interesting thing happened at the board meeting on Thursday evening. Each person who wanted to address the board was given five minutes to speak. I was one of the people who signed up to speak. Knowing that the building fund money cannot be commingled with the administrative money I asked the board if they could cut the building fund tax rate to reduce the impact of the tax increase for the general fund. I did not receive an answer to my question. As everyone knows the board has been buying a lot of property for future schools even though the schools are not overcrowded at this time and enrollment is not increasing. One might say that the board has been spending money like a drunken sailor except that a drunken sailor spends his own money – not yours and mine. Reducing one rate while raising the other would appear to be a sensible solution to their alleged problem. You can bet that the board will never reduce a tax rate though.

However, excuse me for digressing. Shortly after I began to speak I stated that I was bothered by the fact that a board member wanted to have his tax liability reduced but wanted to increase mine. Superintendent Upchurch decided at that point that I was criticizing a board member and that was not allowed. Therefore, he told me to stop speaking. Another example of who was running the show as Upchurch was giving the orders even though it was a Board of Education meeting. I quickly took notice that the chairwoman of the board, Joyce Flethcer, was not in charge. Not wanting to create a disturbance and distract from the other speakers I sat down. However, I can assure Mr. Upchurch that he will never stop me from speaking at another board meeting. I will totally ignore anything that he has to say. If he is not happy with that, we can discuss it in federal court. His presence is not necessary to have a board meeting.

In summary, I was not surprised that the board passed the tax increase. I had spoken with Larry Dodson earlier in the week about the proposed tax increase and he told me that the money was needed to hire more teachers and to give the staff a raise. That was reiterated by Upchurch at the meeting. Moreover, Dodson stated to me that Jefferson County had raised their rate by 29% as though that justified Oldham County raising its rate. The fact is that Jefferson County did not raise their rate by 29% but rather by a similar amount to Oldham County. This is not the first time that Mr. Dodson has appeared to confused about the facts.

It is worth mentioning that nobody that spoke was in favor of the tax increase. John Black spoke but he did not take a position on the issue. He was simply trying to ride the fence and to convince someone to vote for him. I might add that I stayed around for a few minutes after the meeting and listened to some of the crowd talk to each other. Judging from their comments, Black did not win any votes. Sorry John but that is the way I saw it.

MAGISTRATE CHURCH TO CONTINUE TO SERVE ON THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE

2010-07-21T22:22:00.003-04:00

I was advised today that Magistrate Steve Church will continue to serve on the Human Resources committee of the Oldham County Fiscal Court. It had been inferred at the last meeting on July 20, 2010 that he would be replaced by Magistrate Bob Leslie. Apparently Leslie will also remain on the committee and there will now be four members on the committee instead of three.

It is believed that Judge Duane Murner will clarify this issue at the next meeting of the fiscal court.

MANY REPUBLICANS ANGRY OVER GOP SELECTION PROCESS FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY NOMINEE

2010-07-21T02:46:00.002-04:00

Recently the Oldham County GOP selected a nominee to replace John Fendley on the November 2010 ballot as the GOP candidate for Oldham County Attorney. I have received many calls from people questioning the process. Many people assumed that Galen Clark would be selected as the nominee since he had run for the nomination on two occasions and narrowly lost to incumbent John Fendley in the May 2010 primary. However, this was not the case. Attorney John Carter was selected by the GOP Executive Committee to be the nominee. To my knowledge none of the candidates were interviewed by the committee. The chairperson said that time did not permit that. I do not agree with that as there were only four candidates. I guess there is no need to interview if your mind is already made up.

First, let me make it clear that there are no rules that would dictate that Galen Clark should have been selected as the nominee. However, he did run for the nomination and barely lost to John Fendley. It is a fact that certain members of the Fendley family did not want Galen Clark to be the replacement on the GOP ticket for John Fendley. One might believe that the Republican Party owed something to John Fendley. The fact of the matter is, the Republican Party did not owe John Fendley anything. John Fendley was a Democrat until just before the 2006 elections. I personally heard John Fendley state to the Republican Party at a party meeting that he only switched to the Republican Party in order to be elected. At least he was honest. However, he was not a long-time Republican – he was an opportunist.

For the record, I supported Galen Clark in the May 2010 primary. However, after he lost, and the last time that I spoke with John Fendley, I told him that I would be supporting him in the November election and I told him that he was welcome to put a sign in my yard. I regret that I will not be able to do that because John Fendley earned the nomination. However, his family did not earn the nomination. Therefore, I thought that the nomination should have gone to Galen Clark.

Frankly, I believe that the Republican Party Executive Committee treated Galen Clark unfairly. If there was something in Galen Clark’s past that should have kept him from receiving the nomination, the information should have been made public. Further, Clark should have been given the opportunity to present his side of the story. Instead of Clark being given that opportunity the party sought John Carter to apply for the nomination. It is my understanding that there were four candidates, including Clark and Carter. One of the other candidates was Courtney Baxter whom current County Judge Executive Duane Murner had chosen to serve the remainder of the unexpired term of Fendley. That selection is a whole different story. Supposedly, Murner selected her instead of Clark or Stuart Ulferts, the democratic nominee, in order to keep politics out of the selection. It appears that he was trying to give Baxter a political advantage.

As stated before, the executive committee was not bound to select Clark, however to not select him was a slap in the face of almost fifty percent of the Republican voters who voted in the primary election in May. In essence, a nine member executive committee overruled half of the Republican voters of Oldham County. That showed a total lack of gratitude. Many Republicans in Oldham County have a right to be angry and, if what I am hearing is indicative of their anger, they are very angry.

If anyone on the executive committee knew something about Galen Clark that was so bad that he should not serve as County Attorney, and did not share it with the public before the primary election, that person would have been doing a disservice to all of the people in Oldham County, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents.

Politically speaking, the Republican Party had an opportunity to secure the office for many years to come due to Clark’s age. Instead the committee chose a candidate who will soon be sixty-six years old and unlikely to want to serve many years. Or could it have been that they wanted a candidate who would only serve only one term? That would give John Fendley’s son, Daniel, an opportunity to move to Oldham County and be qualified to run in 2014 without having to face an incumbent. With the way this selection was made anything is possible.

MAGISTRATE CHURCH BECOMES SELECTIVE WITH HIS PARTICIPATION ON FISCAL COURT

2010-07-21T01:47:00.002-04:00

In the fiscal court meeting on July 20, 2010 it was announced that Magistrate Steve Church had asked to be removed from the human resources committee since he would not be serving after December 2010. Magistrate Church was replaced with Magistrate Bob Leslie who will be an able replacement.

At the time that the announcement was made I thought that it was odd as elected officials, although defeated in either a primary or general election, usually continue to serve out their term in office and vote on issues that are brought before them. As far as I know Church did not resign from all of the committees on which he serves. Why did he just choose to resign from one committee? Later in the meeting County Judge Duane Murner nominated a replacement to the planning and zoning commission. Considering Magistrate Church’s position on being on the human resources committee, I thought that he might opt to not vote on anything that was going to have any effect after January 2011. As the commissioners are nominated for a four-year term, I thought perhaps Magistrate Church might opt to not vote on the nominee. However, Magistrate Church did vote to approve the nomination.

The question now is, will Magistrate Church abstain from voting on issues or matters that will continue to affect the county after he is out of office? It appears that he will just be selective with his participation on fiscal court.

If Magistrate Church considered his term completed or over when he was defeated in the May primary, why didn't he just resign at that time and save the taxpayers the cost of his salary? Frankly, I thought that he might either resign or miss a lot of meetings. After all, he did appear to feel that he was doing the residents of Oldham County a favor by serving.

QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED TO FILL VACANT COUNTY ATTORNEY POSITION

2010-07-05T13:56:00.003-04:00

Due to the recent untimely and unfortunate death of John Fendley, the position of Oldham County Attorney has become vacant, thereby making it necessary to fill the vacancy. Therefore, I thought this might be an appropriate time for discussion on the eligibility requirements for the person selected to fill the vacancy.

In the situation at hand, two separate selections must be made. First, someone must be selected to finish the unexpired term of John Fendley. The term expires at the end of 2010. This selection is made by the County Judge-Executive Duane Murner. Then, someone must be selected to replace John Fendley on the November ballot as the Republican nominee. This selection is made by the executive committee of the Oldham County Republican Party and must be made by 4:00 PM July 13, 2010.

Now what are the qualifications to be the County Attorney? §100 of the Kentucky constitution states as follows:

No person shall be eligible to the offices mentioned in Sections 97 and 99 who is not at the time of his election twenty-four years of age (except Clerks of County and Circuit Courts, who shall be twenty-one years of age), a citizen of Kentucky, and who has not resided in the State two years, and one year next preceding his election in the county and district in which he is a candidate. No person shall be eligible to the office of Commonwealth's Attorney unless he shall have been a licensed practicing lawyer four years. No person shall be eligible to the office of County Attorney unless he shall have been a licensed practicing lawyer two years. No person shall be eligible to the office of Clerk unless he shall have procured from a Judge of the Court of Appeals, or a Judge of a Circuit Court, a certificate that he has been examined by the Clerk of his Court under his supervision, and that he is qualified for the office for which he is a candidate (Emphasis added)

The language in the constitution is pretty clear cut and leaves little room for doubt. However, it does use the term “election” which might make some people believe that the qualifications might be different for someone appointed, rather than elected, to the position.

The question that arises is, do these same qualifications apply to a person appointed to the position of County Attorney? Common sense would say that the qualifications would be the same. After all, can you imagine having a County Attorney who was not of legal age or one who was not an attorney? Thus, if one of the requirements is necessary, it would follow that all of the requirements must be satisfied by the appointee. I was unable to find anything in the Kentucky constitution, the Kentucky Revised Statutes, or the Kentucky Administrative Regulations that addressed the qualifications of an appointee. However, I did find an opinion of the Kentucky Attorney General, OAG 67-223, that states that A person appointed to fill a vacancy in the office of County Attorney must possess the qualifications at time of appointment.

Obviously the name of Galen Clark has been mentioned as the possible appointee to the position as he has sought the position on two prior occasions and narrowly lost to Fendley in the May 18, 2010 primary. Assuming that he is qualified for the position pursuant to the constitution, which I believe that he is, I will focus on other segments of Kentucky law.

§ 118.345 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes states as follows:
• No candidate who has been defeated for the nomination for any office in a primary election shall have his name placed on voting machines in the succeeding regular election as a candidate for the same office for the nomination to which he was a candidate in the primary election, except that if a vacancy occurs in the party nomination for which he was a candidate in the primary election his name may be placed on voting machines for the regular election as a candidate of that party if he has been duly made such party nominee after the vacancy occurs as provided in KRS 118.105 (Emphasis added)

§ KRS 118.105 (3) states:
• If a vacancy occurs in the nomination of an unopposed candidate or in a nomination made by the primary before the certification of candidates for the regular election made under KRS 118.215, because of death, disqualification to hold the office sought, or severe disabling condition which arose after the nomination, the governing authority of the party may provide for filling the vacancy, but only following certification to the governing authority, by the Secretary of State, that a vacancy exists for a reason specified in this subsection. When such a nomination has been made, the certificate of nomination shall be signed by the chairman and secretary of the governing authority of the party making it, and shall be filed in the same manner as certificates of nomination at a primary election. (Emphasis added)

In view of this, I believe that Galen Clark would be eligible to be the nominee of the Republican Party on the November ballot notwithstanding his defeat in the May primary.

Now, if you are wondering who the next County Attorney will be, just think of the attorneys that you know who reside in Oldham County, who meet all of the requirements, and would be interested in serving in such a position.

RUMOR OVERTURNED

2010-07-02T21:48:00.001-04:00

When a person decides to run for public office in Kentucky he/she must have two people who are members of his party sign his initial filing papers.

For the past few weeks there has been a rumor going around Oldham County that Glen Gish was one of the people who signed the initial filing papers of Galen Clark when he filed to run for Oldham County Attorney in the May 18, 2010 primary election. Does it matter who signs a candidate’s initial papers? Apparently some people believe that it would bother some people if they found out that a particular person had signed a particular candidate’s office. Otherwise they would not start or repeat a rumor of this nature.

For the record, Glen Gish did not sign Clark’s initial filing papers. Having heard this rumor several times, I decided to check out the rumor. I asked Galen Clark about the issue and he informed me that his papers were signed by Greg Streif, a long time friend, and Susan Clark, his spouse. An inquiry with the office of the County Clerk confirmed Clark’s statement.

Additionally, Clark’s picture, along with his spouse and Streif, appeared in the January 14, 2010 edition of the Oldham Era announcing Clark’s filing for the office of County Attorney. It is unfortunate that this rumor was started but those things do happen when people repeat stories without verifying them.

TEMPORARY ABSENCE

2010-06-23T12:16:00.002-04:00

As many of you have probably noticed, there have not been any new articles on the site lately. The reason for that is that I have had my right shoulder replaced. I seem to be doing fine.

I anticipate that I will again be putting new articles up on the sight in the near future.

Thanks for your patience. I notice that the traffic is not as high as before but it is better than I expected.

Dewey R. Wotring

SCOTT DAVIS' STATEMENTS CONFIRMED BY STEVE MASIELLO

2010-06-10T01:08:00.005-04:00

Many people have been following the stories regarding Magistrate Scott Davis’ problems with his company, DerbyDeals.com. There have been several stories in the press within the last three days so I will not belabor the issue any more here.

The purpose of this story is to take you back to a news report on FOX 41 TV News in which Larry Wilder, one of the attorneys representing University of Louisville assistant basketball coach Steve Masiello asserted that Masiello had never met Magistrate Scott Davis, did not know him, had not conducted any business with him. Remember, this is the same Larry Wilder who dumped the trash from his neighbor’s trash can and then crawled into the can and went to sleep where he was found the following morning.

Now, according to an affidavit filed by Officer Sean Kennedy of the Jeffersonville, IN police department, Masiello has admitted that he had met with Davis on several occasions and that he had taken money from Davis for the purpose of providing Kentucky Derby tickets to him. Actually Masiello essentially verified everything that Magistrate Scott Davis alleged in a lawsuit that he filed against Masiello.

In order for people to make their own comparisons of what Davis alleged in his lawsuit and what Masiello has admitted to, I have posted both the lawsuit and the affidavit of the police officer on this web site. You can view the lawsuit by clicking here and you can view the affidavit by clicking here.

If nothing else, this should expose Attorney Larry Wilder for making statements that are less than candid. Is Wilder going to continue to deny that his client knew Davis or is he going to say that his client was less than truthful with him?

ADVICE FOR CRESTWOOD

2010-06-06T20:13:00.003-04:00

GISH APPOINTED TO POSITION OF DEPUTY COUNTY JUDGE EXECUTIVE

2010-06-02T23:42:00.001-04:00

Judge Duane Murner appointed Paula Gish to the position of Deputy County Judge/Executive on May 24, 2010. She had held the position prior to being defeated in her bid for the Republican nomination for County Judge/Executive. Gish was serving in the position at the time the Office of Special Counsel determined that she was in violation of the Hatch Act. She resigned the position on May 14, 2010.

Murner announced her appointment to the Fiscal Court on June 1, 2010. At the time of his announcement Murner stated that state law allowed him to appoint her without the approval of the Fiscal Court. He also stated that the Fiscal Court was supposed to set her salary. However, the Court did not do that at the June 1st. meeting. Therefore, in my opinion, any salary that she receives will be illegal and she may be required to repay the money to the county should someone take the issue to court.

It is obvious that Murner deliberately skirted the issue. I suspect that he was afraid that there might be a lengthy discussion over the amount of money that she should be paid. Frankly, I do not believe that Gish should receive the same salary that she was receiving prior to her resignation. After all, when her initial salary was set her position description stated that she supervised ten other supervisors. However, Murner subsequently told the Office of Special Counsel that she only supervised three people. If one of those people was the payroll clerk, the Kentucky state auditor had determined that she was not qualified to supervise that position. In view of these issues one would believe that her salary should have been drastically reduced. Perhaps Murner did not want to risk additional embarrassment on top of having recently having his hand picked candidate lose the nomination to be his successor.

Murner’s deliberate side stepping of the salary issue was a deliberate slap in the face of the members of Fiscal Court. Is anyone surprised?

SEWER DISTRICT SUGGESTION BY OFFICIAL

2010-06-02T23:41:00.002-04:00

SEWER RATES SOAR

2010-06-02T23:40:00.000-04:00

At the June 1, 2010 meeting of the Oldham County Fiscal Court the Court approved a 22.9% increase in sewer rates for all customers of the Oldham County Sewer District (OCSD). The sewer district indicated that the ratepayers could expect additional raises in the next three years to bring the total increase to approximately 45%.

These rate increases will allow the OCSD to obtain 2.5 million dollars in loans. Those loans will allow the district to make changes that will allow two new subdivisions, Buckner Crossings and Quail Creek, to immediately connect to sewers and thereby begin construction. The district stated that they needed the additional customers in order to have additional income to repay their loan.

Now the irony of that claim is that the district stated yesterday that the bad economy has caused many homes to go in foreclosure, which in turns reduces the income of the district. If the economy is that bad, what made the sewer district believe that the new subdivisions will be able to sell their homes in the near future? This question was raised by Magistrate Iva Davis, and actually the representative of the sewer district agreed with her but still stated that they would receive additional income. I believe that this was done to help future development as much as any other reason. Once again, they win.

Consideration is being given to consolidating the OCSD with the recently formed Stormwater District. That will be a bad move. The Fiscal Court should just eliminate both districts and take over the management of both. Everyone seems to agree that the OCSD has had poor management in the past, however, the Fiscal Court seems to want to stay with the same concept.

My prediction is that eventually all of the residents of the county will be asked to repay the loans of the OCSD event though only about 25% of the households in the county are customers of the OCSD. The OCSD must have additional money to provide the infrastructure for future development and the developers will continue to refuse to pay for the infrastructure even though they benefit from it the most.

WHO CHOOSES COUNTY JUDGE

2010-05-31T23:07:00.004-04:00

In this instance I do not believe that the developers made the decision. However, it isn't because they didn't try.

OLDHAM COUNTY MYSTERY MAN ON THE PEOPLE OF OLDHAM COUNTY

2010-05-31T22:39:00.007-04:00

After seeing the election results this may not be considered a true statement.

SEWER RATES TO INCREASE BY 23.9% AND WILL CONTINUE TO ESCALATE

2010-05-22T23:15:00.001-04:00

On May 21, 2010 The Oldham County Sewer District held a meeting to discuss their proposed budget for the upcoming year as well as a proposed rate increase for all customers. Also present at the meeting was Scott Davis, Bob Diebel, and Rick Rash, members of the Fiscal Court Utilities Committee.

A brief history of sewers in Oldham County is necessary to have a better understanding of the situation. Several years ago the Planning and Zoning Commission passed rules that were approved by the Fiscal Court which required that homes built on smaller lots had to be on sewers. Since there was no county-wide sewer system this meant that developers wishing to develop subdivisions had to build individual treatment plants for their subdivisions. These are referred to as “package plants.” There were and still are several of these plants around Oldham County. Many of these plants began to have problems as they were operating without sufficient capacity to serve all of the homes that they were forced to service. Further, some of them were not properly maintained for many years.

The county, for a variety of reasons, decided to form a sewer district. The sewer district purchased these small package plants and brought them into their system. In reality, some of the plants should have been given to the district or the district should have been paid to take them because they had so many problems and were a financial burden to operate. In addition to the package plants, the sewer district constructed plants at Buckner and most recently a plant known as the Ohio River plant. The district is also operating a plant at the reformatory in LaGrange.

The state Division of Water monitors these plants and determines how many customers each plant is capable of servicing. At the present time only the plant at the reformatory and the Ohio River plant are not running at capacity. Also, LaGrange has a plant located near the Oldham Reserve on New Moody Lane that is not a part of the OCSD. It was disclosed at this latest meeting that the LaGrange plant is also operating at capacity. This makes me wonder what they are going to do to address the needs of businesses and the additional housing at the Oldham Reserve if it ever starts to develop. It looks to me like someone will have to build another plant. I am sure that it will be the taxpayers. This is just another example of poor planning by the people who thought that the Oldham reserve was a great idea. Small minds with big eyes will cause problems.

A few years ago the City of Crestwood put in sewers and they were initially serviced by the Metropolitan Sewer District. Subsequently, Crestwood decided to merge its district with the OCSD, however MSD continued treatment for an agreed upon cost and surcharge to the customers.

Over the years the management of the OCSD has been below par and according to Stan Clark, the current chief financial officer of Oldham County, the books are in such disarray that an audit cannot be performed in a timely manner as is required by state law. Clark and County Judge/Executive Duane Murner claim that the books had to be reconstructed for periods dating back all the way to 1998. The audit is still not complete and is months overdue.

Over the years the OCSD sold future “tap-ons” (taps) to developers that they did not have sufficient capacity to service. According to the current board of the OCSD, the developers knew that the capacity was not available but they purchased the taps because the fee was going to increase significantly in some instances and in other instances the developers just wanted to get a place in line. However, the sewer district used the money received from the taps for daily operational expenses, not to retire debt on the plants. The district used about 1.8 million dollars of those fees for operational expenses.

In 2008, it became obvious that the OCSD had serious management problems. Judge-Executive Duane Murner then forced the sewer district to get rid of all of its employees and enter into a contract with Veolia Water Company to operate the district. At the time Dennis Deibel, the mayor of Crestwood, was the chairman of the district. When it became obvious that Veolia Water was going to manage the district, Deibel resigned from the district board and took the City of Crestwood out of the district. He also took $61,000 with him that he claimed belonged to the City of Crestwood. In any event, when the dust settled the sewer district had outstanding debt exceeding ten million dollars and no credit.

Then the OCSD asked the Fiscal Court to assume responsibility of over seven million dollars of that debt. Their stated basis for the request was that the county could get a better rate on the outstanding bonds that would result in a savings to the district. (The sewer district is supposed to repay the county the seven million dollars.) The Fiscal Court, knowing that the sewer district books were a mess, and without knowing the real financial condition of the district, assumed the responsibility for the debt. Stan Clark, said at the meeting yesterday that the district is insolvent – nobody will loan it money. I am on record as having said at the time the Fiscal Court assumed the responsibility for the debt, another reason the sewer district wanted the county to assume the debt was so that it would then be debt free and would be able to borrow even more money. They denied this. Well, guess what. The sewer district has applied for a 2.5 million dollar loan. However, to get the loan the district must show that it has enough income to repay the loan. Thus the district wants to increase the sewer rates by 23.9% now. The present chairman of the sewer district, Horace Harrod, said that people can expect rate increases of at least 5% per year in the future due to the management contract that the sewer district has with Veolia Water Company. Over the next five years, they anticipate rate increases of over 40% in total.

The district claims that their income is down 12% due to people using less water. (I guess the moral of the story is; try to conserve and you will have to pay more for using less.) Stan Clark said that part of the reason that water consumption is down is because throughout the county 3% of the homes have their water turned off which means that they have no water bill and therefore no sewer bill. He said that figure was 5% for the Glen Oaks subdivision. He said that he believed that the discontinued water service was due to homes being in foreclosure.

The district claims that the only way that they can make more money is to have more customers. They seem to be specifically targeting two proposed subdivisions, Buckner Crossings and Quail Creek. Both of these developments would be serviced by the Buckner plant. However, that plant is already operating at capacity and the state will not allow them to take on any more customers. The district’s solution is to put in a new pipeline to the plant at the Kentucky State Reformatory and take the Buckner plant offline. There are two problems here. First and foremost is that the district is gambling that the economy will pick up as well as the housing market. They are willing to make this gamble after stating that many homes are already in foreclosure. Further, everybody knows that the housing market is in the tank. The other problem is that the sewer district wants to promote more development in a county that just indicated that it doesn’t want uncontrolled development by rejecting the candidates who have been supported by developers. Also, the district does not seem to be concerned about the affect of the additional development on the remaining parts of the infrastructure.

We can expect to see the sewer district push for additional development in the future to solve a problem that was caused by development and bad management. I am not convinced that the management is any better today than it ever was. The Fiscal Court has some control over the district by having the final say on the rate increases. However, the Fiscal Court certainly has not been up to the task of having sufficient oversight over the district in the past. Remember, Judge Murner has been telling us for several months that the required audit of the sewer district was coming shortly. Now we are being told that it will be done in June. Seeing is believing.

The sewer district came to the meeting hoping to get their proposed rate increase approved by the utilities committee. However, Magistrate Scott Davis brought up the matter of the audit and it became apparent that he would not vote for the increase without seeing the audit. Hopefully, that pressure will drive the district to have the audit by June. The people should be glad that Scott Davis is around to step up for them. Other magistrates will question a few things to make it look as though they know what they are doing, even though in most cases they have no clue. Perhaps they do know something but when all is said and done they vote for whatever the Murner administration wants. Scott Davis remains firm in his beliefs. Scott Davis’ absence from the next court will certainly result in a void for all of the people in the county.

The sewer district, like the Oldham Reserve, is a ticking time bomb. Incoming Judge-Executive Voegele will have a lot on his plate. Judge-Executive Murner and the current Fiscal Court have pushed out interest and principal payments that were due in order to balance the budget. They have always touted a balanced budget. Not paying your bills makes it easier to give a false impression that you have balanced the budget.

Management of the sewer district reminds me of the Obama administration in that both believe that you get out of debt by borrowing more and spending more. Hang on folks! We are in for a long ride.

STEVE CHURCH WILL NO LONGER HAVE TO DO THE PEOPLE OF OLDHAM COUNTY A FAVOR

2010-05-19T02:03:00.001-04:00

Magistrate Steve Church once stated that he did not ask to be a magistrate and insinuated that he was doing the people of Oldham County a favor by serving as a magistrate. Well, after being defeated on Tuesday by former magistrate Brent Likens, Mr. Church can return to his normal routine. I believe that the people of Oldham County will survive. Everybody can be replaced.

Steve Church was appointed to the position of magistrate in 2007 after the incumbent, Paula Gish, resigned to take the position of Deputy County Judge/Executive. Subsequently, he ran for the unexpired term and was elected. It was after that he said that he never asked for the job. I always thought that when you asked the public for their vote you were asking for the job.

VOEGELE DROPS NUCLEAR BOMB ON ESTABLISHMENT

2010-05-19T01:45:00.001-04:00

David took on Goliath on May 18, 2010 and slew him! Yes, David Voegele beat the establishment and will be the next county judge/executive of Oldham County. Voegele demonstrated that hard work still pays off sometimes.

I coined the name “Murnish” because I thought that Paula Gish actually represented the Murner/Gish administration. Three months ago few people thought that David Voegele had a chance of beating Paula Murnish, yet he did it by 23%. That is not a narrow margin. This was a huge blow to Duane Murner and his administration as he too was defeated in this race as though he were running. He endorsed Gish and supported her financially. He took every opportunity that he could to put her in front of the public. Hopefully he realizes that this was a rejection of his administration and him personally.

Paula Gish was backed by the establishment that included the development industry and those associated with it. She had over four times the amount of money for her campaign that David Voegele had. However, she did not have the work ethic that Voegele had. Voegele worked as hard as any candidate that I have seen in years. He could be found on street corners, in the middle of intersections, or talking to anyone that would listen. David Voegele had a message that included ideas while Gish had shallow statements that said nothing. She repeated the same statements over and over. Perhaps people tired of her reminding them that she was second in command and that she had served so long in the PTA. I also believe that there was a certain amount of “vote against the incumbent” attitude that hurt Gish. The overall results in the election reflected that as well as what we have seen happening across the nation.

Voegele’s victory, coupled with the drastic change of the makeup of fiscal court should give us a huge change in the way Oldham County government conducts business. If this election did not reflect a mandate for change there never will be a mandate. I believe that David Voegele realizes that.

The Oldham County Watchdog congratulates David Voegele. It is his time to bask in the sun.

DRASTIC CHANGE IN MAKEUP OF OLDHAM COUNTY FISCAL COURT

2010-05-19T01:43:00.003-04:00

Five incumbents lost their position on the Oldham County fiscal court on Tuesday, May 18, 2010. That, along with the defeat of Paula Gish by David Voegele will surely change the way the county government is run and hopefully it is the end of “politics as usual” in the county.

Magistrate Iva Davis was defeated by JD Sparks in her attempt to serve a second term. Magistrate Scott Davis was also defeated in his bid for a second term. He was defeated by Kevin Eldridge. Long time incumbent Robert "Bob" Deibel, Jr. was defeated by Mike Logsdon. Incumbent Steve Church was defeated by former magistrate Brent Likens and another long time magistrate, Rick Rash was defeated by Bob Dye. Dye had narrowly lost to Rash in 2006. Therefore, his defeat of Rash was predicted by many people. Rash had essentially followed the establishment and had voted for all fee and tax increases. Further, he supported the unpopular attempt to construct an airpor in the county.

Could it be that the people are in the mood to vote against any incumbent? Since only two incumbents were re-elected one might easily come to that conclusion. However, I believe that most of the people that were defeated in Oldham county had ties to the development industry and the people in Oldham County want to take back control of their county. Certainly the people were not happy with Murner/development administration. With the economic times being what they are the people were also tired of higher taxes and fees.

Only one of the magistrates that lost did not have ties to development. That was Scott Davis and the Oldham Era did a lot to unseat him. They wrote an article about his recent business problems and committed many “sins of omission” by not telling the entire story as they knew it. Scott Davis did more to open up the government of Oldham County than any other magistrate in my thirty-three years of residence in this county. The Oldham Era even chastised him for trying to bring about transparency regarding the anonymous donation to the county while admitting that the newspaper should have been pursuing the issue but did not do so. He followed his campaign promises of four years ago and kept in touch with his constituency while also voting against all fee and tax increases. Someday the people will realize what they have lost. I suppose that the people decided that he was guilty without giving him an opportunity to prove his innocence.

From what I know of the people who were elected on Tuesday, I believe that Oldham County will have a better government. I believe that the newly elected officials will be inquisitive and that will be a welcome change over most of the people they will be replacing who seemed to be happy to blindly follow the leadership of Duane Murner. On the other hand, I believe that they will be working with the best interests of the county in their hearts. January 1, 2011 will the dawning of a new day!

NO SURPRISE: SCOTT DAVIS FOR SIXTH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

2010-05-17T11:15:00.001-04:00

This endorsement probably comes as a surprise to nobody. Many people will immediately say that I am biased. Well, how does a person become biased? Sometimes it is because of family relationship, sometimes due to school affiliations, sometimes due to mutual acquaintances. And the list goes on. In this case, I am biased because Scott Davis represents my philosophy in government. That is, he is a fiscal conservative who believes in an open and transparent government. Moreover, he told his constituents what he would do for them and he has delivered what he promised. I would think that a lot of people would be biased toward Scott Davis for the same reasons that I am.

I know that the local media has made a big issue over his recent private business problem. However, that is just what it is - private. The local media has not presented the entire story as they know it. Rather they portrayed it, as they obviously wanted it to be seen. Mr. Davis has not been charged with anything. That cannot be said about his opponent in the Republican primary. However, in fairness to Kevin Eldridge, he has not been convicted of anything either.

On the other hand, there is one candidate that has been determined to have been in violation of a federal law for several months. By doing that the candidate, Paula Gish, has placed the county in the position of possibly having to forfeit federal funds. Yet, she continues to be a candidate. Additionally, the sitting County Judge has been found guilty twice of violating laws relating to an open government and he continues to serve. I have not heard the local press call for him to resign nor to beat up on him. Where is the equity in this county?

Meanwhile, Magistrate Scott Davis has done more to bring about an open government in Oldham County than any other politician that I can remember in the thirty-three years that I have resided in this county. Moreover, he has kept his promise to his constituents to be fiscally conservative and to communicate with them. The number of communication forums that he conducted during this term in office is more than triple the number that any other politician that I know of in Oldham County. Why should I not endorse him. The people of the sixth district would be well served by re-electing him for another term.

FENDLEY ALLEGATIONS DO NOT DISCLOSE EVERYTHING

2010-05-17T09:04:00.003-04:00

John Fendley stated in an ad that he placed in a newspaper that his opponent, Galen Clark, was the only candidate to be sued in recent years in Oldham Circuit Court. He claims that Clark had been sued twice for failing to pay his Homeowner Association dues.

There are two things wrong with this statement. First, Clark is not the only candidate to be sued. Kevin Eldridge, a candidate for magistrate in the sixth district, is currently a defendant in Oldham Circuit Court. It has been alleged that he failed to provide records when requested to do so under the Open Records Act. Perhaps Fendley was referring only to candidates for the office of County Attorney. However, he should have clarified that.

Additionally, Fendley should have clarified that the lawsuits against Clark were dropped. As a matter of fact the Homeowners’ Association that brought the charges issued an apology for having brought the charges. I have posted a copy of that apology. It can be viewed by clicking here. Does Mr. Fendley prosecute his cases without getting all of the facts or does he get the facts and just not disclose them?

HARPER FOR OLDHAM COUNTY JAILER

2010-05-15T17:10:00.001-04:00

My endorsement of David Harper for the office of county jailer may come as a surprise for many readers. David Harper has admitted that he has no experience running a jail. He has said that from the beginning. Frankly, he has been honest about that. Mr. Harper does have business experience and I know that he is a hard worker. I have spoken to his some of his customers and they seem to be satisfied with his product.

As for Mike Simpson, he is a nice man. However, Mr. Simpson favors the construction of a new jail and he feels that the jail should be a profit making venture although that certainly is not the objective of prison institutions. The only prison institutions that I know of that are for profit are privately operated prisons. They can make a profit because they work on a contract basis. It is easy for private institutions to adapt to the change in the flow of prisoners through an institution.

Trying to construct a new jail that would be operated by government with the idea in mind that it will be a profit making venture is risky business. It is something that the government should not attempt to do. Government should not be operating to try to make a profit.

The primary purpose of the Oldham County jail should be to house prisoners that pass through the court system in Oldham County. We should try to do that as economically as possible.

I know that some people believe that we should consider not incarcerating Oldham County residents if we can place federal, state, or other prisoners in our jail because we make money by housing them while it costs us money to house our own violators. That is absolutely absurd. I have heard one magistrate make that comment. I do not believe that David advocates the construction of a new jail. By the way, Paula Gish has said that she would consider the construction of a new jail. Considering the amount of debt that this county has at the present time that is simply not conceivable. The residents of Oldham County are already facing enough financial risk.

LESLIE ENDORSSED IN DISTRICT THREE MAGISTRATE RACE

2010-05-15T16:50:00.002-04:00

Although Tim Smith made a good impression on me at the Westport debates, I am endorsing Bob Leslie for magistrate for the third district. Bob has kept his word to his constituents by opposing all tax increases. He has made that pledge again and I believe that he will again keep his word.

Bob Leslie is a gentleman and was one of the first magistrates to oppose the construction of an airport in Oldham County even though the majority of the other magistrates and the Judge/Executive favored the construction of the airport.

Certainly the competition presented by Tim Smith will keep Leslie aware that his constituents would have a choice if Leslie were to abandon them. District three is fortunate to have two people interested in serving them.

I will not be making an endorsement for the second district, as Wayne Theiss is the only person seeking that office. I know that he is pleased to be in that position. The fact that no other person chose to oppose him says one of two things. Either there is a lot of apathy in the district or the people were of the belief that Mr. Theiss would serve them well. Mr. Theiss previously has held the office of magistrate.

As for the fourth district, I will not make an endorsement. The incumbent, Steve Greenwell is a gentleman. However, I have not been happy with his support of the Murner Administration, including his support of all of the tax and fee increases. He certainly could act more independently. One plus for Greenwell is that he decided that he would oppose the construction of an airport after learning that his constituents were opposed to the airport. However, before he reached that decision his failure to recognize reality caused many people a lot of extra work and strife.

Although it obvious that I do not believe that Mr. Greenwell is the best that district four could do, I cannot endorse his opponent, Lambert Franklin, as I know nothing about him. Thus, he may well have the same approach to issues, to include taxes, that Mr. Greenwell has. There has to be some reason for me to endorse a candidate and I do not have a specific reason to endorse Mr. Franklin.

HARRISON ENDORSED FOR COUNTY CLERK: LIKENS FOR MAGISTRATE

2010-05-15T16:02:00.004-04:00

On my endorsement of Galen Clark I have received some negative feedback from readers of the Watchdog . I am not surprised at this as John Fendley has been a resident of Oldham County for many years and has been the County Attorney for several years. Some of the comments were valid. I expect this race to be much closer than the last race between Fendley and Clark. Also, my endorsement of a candidate does not mean that I do, or do not believe, the candidate that I endorsed will win.

On to my next endorsement, I have decided to endorse Gena Harrison for the office of County Clerk. I have listened to the debates between these two ladies and I have attended the forums where they spoke. Additionally, I have interviewed both of the candidates. Moreover, I have received information about both candidates that was positive and negative. After considering everything that I have heard, I have decided that a change in the management of the office of the County Clerk would be the best thing for the people of Oldham County.

I understand that the incumbent Julie Barr now charges $3 if a person comes to the office to renew their registration and does not bring a copy of their old registration with them even though the old copy is not necessary for the issuance of a new registration. The copy of the registration that they present is shredded. I could understand this fee if a person were there solely for the purpose of obtaining a new registration because he/she had lost there original registration and it was not time for them to renew their license. However, to charge someone $3 for something that is not required, is nothing more than a method of getting into the taxpayer’s pocket. This, I cannot condone. I have heard Ms. Barr brag about returning fees to the Fiscal Court. Using these methods makes me understand how she does it. For her to be able to brag about returning fees to the Court at the taxpayers’ expense is just not the right thing to do. To add insult to injury she had a huge check printed at the taxpayers' expense to show that she was returning funds to the court. Did she not remember that the money that she was returning was the taxpayers' money. This was nothing more than grandstanding and was unnecessary.

As many people are aware, many offices now have what is known as a “dress down” day and it is usually Friday. Ms. Barr has instituted this in her office. However, she has added another twist to it. She charges the employees a fee for wearing jeans to work. I also have a problem with that and if I were an employee, I would not stand for it. Also, you may have noticed that Ms. Barr now requires all of her employees to wear uniform shirts. I believe that it is tacky. After all, these are not school children or members of the military. Further, the employees are required to pay for the shirts. If wearing a uniform shirt is so important to the image of the office, why do you have a “dress down” day?
I say get rid of the uniforms and if you are going to continue to have the “dress down” day, do not charge the employees. Please understand that this fee does not go to Ms. Barr, nor does it go to the office. I understand that it goes to some type of charity. The practice is tantamount to forcing someone to donate to a charity and it isn’t right. Keep the business out of my private affairs!

One more issue, in February I made an “open records request” for the names and salaries of all employees of the Clerk’s office. Ms. Barr delayed giving me the requested information for more than two weeks when the law required her to furnish the information within three days. Let me add that this was information that should have been readily available and only consisted of one page of information. When I received the information it was not on any stationery that identified it as having come from the Clerk’s office and it only contained the first initial of each employee. It appeared to me, and I still believe, that Ms. Barr was trying to keep the information as vague as possible and also make it difficult to link the information to her office.

It is true that Gena Harrison may not have the experience that Ms. Barr has. However, running the office of the County Clerk is not rocket science and Harrison did work in the office for eight years. Vote for Ms. Harrison.

Let us move on to the first magisterial district. There I am forced to endorse Brent Likens for a couple of reasons. First, the incumbent, Steve Church, said publicly in a Fiscal Court meeting that he did not want the job of magistrate and that he took it only because he was asked to. Further, Mr. Church has voted for every fee and tax increase brought before the court during his term in office. Additionally, he has accepted campaign contributions from people with ties to the development industry. As a matter of fact, he has openly stated that he favors development.

Mr. Likens has been a magistrate previously. Thus, both candidates have experience in the position. Generally speaking, I favor a sweep of the incumbents. In my opinion their leadership has been seriously flawed. The people of Oldham County deserve better and have the opportunity to do better this election.

COUNTY ATTORNEY AND 7TH DISTRICT ENDORSEMENTS

2010-05-13T21:38:00.001-04:00

It is getting close to election-day so it is time to speed up a little if I am going to get all of these endorsements done before the elections.

After a lot of thinking and talking to a lot of people I have decided to endorse Galen Clark for County Attorney. Yes, John Fendley has a lot of experience as a County Attorney and Galen Clark has none. However, the time has come for Oldham County to get some fresh ideas and that requires changes. Therefore, people should vote for Galen Clark.

In my opinion Fendley has given some bad advice to other county officials in the past. The decision that affected me, and many other residents of Oldham County, the most was his advice to the County Clerk a few years ago to disqualify 2200 names on a petition that I helped circulate regarding the increase in the property tax rate levied by the Oldham County Board of Education. As a result of that decision the people of Oldham County were not allowed to vote on the issue. Thus, a class action lawsuit was filed and is still pending. If the citizens are successful in the lawsuit, the Oldham County Board of Education may be forced to return over 20 million dollars to the property owners of Oldham County. That will place a huge burden on the Board that could have been avoided.

Moreover, there was the incident of “Roscoe the Pig.” In that instance Fendley advised the animal control officer to kill a pet pig that was frozen to the ground. The owners of the pig sued the county in federal court and they were awarded thousands of dollars in damages. Also, during the current administration it seems to me that the administration has received very poor counsel on a few occasions. I do not know if the advice came from Fendley but that is part of his job.

Meanwhile, Clark is making his second attempt to be elected and I believe that he would serve the county well. He certainly has some fresh ideas about helping the youth of this county and the youth is an important part of the future of not only the county, but the nation. Vote for Galen Clark!

The easiest endorsement to make in all of the races is in the 7th magisterial district. Bob Dye is the clear choice for voters. The incumbent, Rick Rash, wore out his welcome long ago. He has been very demeaning to many people who have come before the court. For that reason alone he is not deserving of one vote.

Rash has continually inferred that he has “hung the moon” in Oldham County by taking credit for everything that he believes the people like. He has voted for every tax and fee increase that has been before Fiscal Court this past term. He has consistently voted with Judge Murner on issues that were detrimental to the people of Oldham County such as the creation of a Stormwater District and the assumption of the Sewer District Debt. And, let us not forget that he voted to double your insurance premium tax.

When Stan Clark first announced that he was running for County Judge Rash was in his corner. I suspect that he was hoping for a job in the administration if Clark were elected. Rash would like to get a government job that would increase his retirement as he has no other employment other than being a magistrate. Rash told me how “dumb” Paula Gish was. He stated that he knew that because she had sat beside him on Fiscal Court for eleven years. However, as soon as Clark announced that he would not be running for judge Rash immediately jumped on Gish’s bandwagon. He is always looking for a way to “feather” his own nest. I guess that I sound critical of Mr. Rash but I have heard him demean so many people and for that I believe the time has come for him to be denied another term in office.

Let us not forget that he also voted for an airport that almost 90% of the people in Oldham County did not want. He continued to voice support for the airport while his brother owned the property that had a very good chance of being the location for the airport. He finally stopped voting on the airport issues at my insistence before the court. I thought that there was a conflict of interest then and I still believe that the conflict was there.

If you only cast one vote on May 18, 2010, cast if for Bob Dye!

OLDHAM ERA FALLS SHORT AGAIN

2010-05-13T12:06:00.003-04:00

The May 12, 2010 issue of the Oldham Era once again gave two examples of why the people of Oldham County should quit buying the Era as I did a long time ago. They consistently leave out important parts of stories and their reporters don’t have the skills to investigate a story even when someone dumps the story in their laps.

First look at the story regarding the resignation on Paula Gish. If you read that story, you would be left believing that the only reason that the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) considered the issue of Gish having violated the Hatch Act is that Paula Gish and Duane Murner wanted to do the right thing. The fact is that I filed a complaint with the OSC regarding Gish and it was a matter of public record as I told the entire Fiscal Court that I had filed the complaint. The Era never contacted me regarding the matter. I furnished a lot of evidence to the OSC and filed an Open Records Request in order to gain some of that evidence.

If Gish and Murner were as intelligent as they claim to be, they would have known that Gish was in violation of the Hatch Act from the beginning. However, Gish wanted to remain on the job as long as possible for the exposure to the public and to continue to claim that she was “second in command” as though she were some military general.

Also in the May 12th issue, the Era wrote another article about Magistrate Scott Davis. Once again the Era did not tell half of the story. The Era failed to mention that Scott Davis has filed a lawsuit against Steve Masiello, assistant basketball coach for the men’s basketball program at the University of Louisville. They also failed to mention that Steve Netherton was involved in the issue. Netherton is a convicted felon. I know that they were aware of this information because I made them aware of the information as did Thomas Clay, the attorney for Scott Davis. Further, there is a link on this site to the entire lawsuit. The lawsuit refers to Masiello and another person named “Steve” who now appears to be Steve Netherton. Clearly, the Era knew that Masiello was involved. However, it appears that mentioning his name would have given credence to Magistrate Scott Davis’ story. Apparently that was not part of the Era plan.

Why did the Era leave out all of this information? To me they did it because they wanted it to appear that Scott Davis was the culprit, and that he alone, failed to deliver tickets to people. If Jackie Stoess Hack ever tried to contact anyone else involved in the story, she never mentioned it. As I have said before, if the Oldham Era does not have the resources or ability to write a complete story it needs to get out of the fast lane and use their paper to report obits, the school lunch programs and the honor roll. That information is provided to them and it doesn’t take much skill to print.

This is not the first time that Jackie Stoess Hack has tried to make Scott Davis look bad. Remember her column titled “Thumbs Up?” It chastised Scott Davis for having filed an Open Records request and for having sued the County Judge when he refused to provide the requested material. However, in the same column the Era admitted that it should have been pursuing the issue.

If the people want to see how a real story should be written, they need look no further than the front page of today’s issue of the Louisville Courier-Journal where they will find an article written about the Scott Davis issue. Then you can see how much information the Era conveniently left out of their story. The timing of these two stories is perfect to demonstrate the difference in the quality of journalism between the two papers. This example should make people drop their subscription to the Oldham Era immediately.

Just to give a little more credence to the Courier story let me add that I also have pictures of three text messages that Steve Masiello sent to Davis regarding this issue.

WINTERS FOR PVA: LOGSDON FOR MAGISTRATE

2010-05-12T18:11:00.002-04:00

The watchdog endorses Ron Winters for the position of Property Valuation Administrator (PVA). Winters’ opponent, Albert Harrison, has served his country valiantly, however, he simply does not have the experience that Ron Winters has. When someone attempts to unseat an incumbent my first question is: Why should I vote for you? In this case Harrison has not given any reason that I believe is worthy of firing Winters from his job.

Winters had the courage to stand by his convictions when a few developers tried to get the other residents of Oldham County to shoulder part of their tax burden. He has appealed the decision of the Appeals Tax Board in an effort to defend and protect the citizens of Oldham County. For that he deserves another term.

On the other hand, Harrison has no experience as an appraiser and no experience in real estate to the best of my knowledge. He does have a lot of experience as a surveyor but I do not believe that surveying experience is as valuable as having been the PVA and having been an appraiser.

If Harrison could show that Winters had violated the law or that there was some other egregious reason that he should not be re-elected, my decision might be different but he has not been able to do that. He has attempted to make an issue of the fact that Winters has hired his wife. While nepotism may offend some people the court has said that Winters did not violate the law by hiring his wife. Further, the experience that I have had with the office of the PVA reflects that she does a good job and that the taxpayers are getting their money’s worth with her.

In the race for magistrate in the eighth district Mike Logsdon is challenging incumbent Bob Deibel. Mr. Deibel is a gentleman but he has little to offer the court now. He has been around for a long time but he does not have any new ideas. Rather, he seems to find it easier to vote as Judge Duane Murner votes. The people need someone who will vote independently of the county judge and someone who does not want to raise our taxes to balance the budget. Raising taxes is not the answer to every crisis. Bob Deibel has voted for every tax and fee increase during the present administration.

Thus, I have chosen to endorse Mike Logsdon. I have spoken with him and I believe that he is a conservative. Can you believe that I am actually endorsing a realtor? I have no problem with that. I believe that Mike will bring fresh ideas to the court and I believe that he has a feel for the needs of the people and business. He is in touch with both.

Vote for Ron Winters and Mike Logsdon on May 18, 2010.

BREAKING NEWS ABOUT SCOTT DAVIS, STEVE MASIElLO AND DERBY TICKETS

2010-05-12T17:39:00.002-04:00

According to an article just posted on the Louisville Courier-Journal web site another person has surfaced in the Kentucky Derby ticket sales. His name is Steve Netherton. For the entire story click here.

WATCHDOG ENDORSEMENTS

2010-05-11T23:16:00.005-04:00

The time has come to announce my endorsements for the May 18, 2010 primary election. I will start today by making a couple of those endorsements and they probably will not be a surprise to you.

First, the race for the county judge/executive office, this is a very easy call for me to make. After having listened to the candidates discuss issues on three different occasions, after reviewing David Voegele’s background, and after reviewing the background of Paula Gish, I recommend that the voters of Oldham County vote for David Voegele.

David Voegele has considerable management experience, has a college degree, and has an excellent background in communications. Meanwhile, Paula Gish has only part-time experience as a secretary in the business world. True, she has been involved in parent teacher associations as has Voegele and she has been a magistrate as has Voegele. The only government experience that she has that David Voegele does not have is that of having been a Deputy County Judge/Executive for three years. And, in that position she was determined to be unqualified to supervise the payroll clerk. The Kentucky State Auditor made this determination during an audit of Oldham County. Simply put, if she is not qualified to supervise a payroll clerk, she certainly is not qualified to run Oldham County. She has sent out several mailings and obviously has more money to spend than David Voegele. However, she has yet to state any goals and has not stated how she would move the county forward. Again, there’s only one real choice in this race and that is David Voegele.

In the race for magistrate of the fifth district the people have a choice between a true Republican and a Democrat who claims she is Republican. The incumbent, Iva Davis, claimed in a recent newspaper article that she switched to the Republican Party in order to vote for Tim Wakefield when he was running for sheriff. However, I believe she told people attending a Republican Party meeting that she switched to the Republican Party because she knew she could not be elected as a Democrat. But it doesn’t matter which of the reasons she changed her party affiliation for, or for that matter if she changed for both reasons. Neither reason is a good reason to change parties. One should only change his/her political affiliation because he/she has had a change of political philosophy or a party that he/she is a member of no longer represents his or her views.

Additionally, I have watched Iva Davis for the past three years on fiscal court. During that entire time I can only recall her making one meaningful contribution to the court. That occurred when she vigorously questioned Joe Schoenbachler, who was the leader of the Oldham County Economic Development agency at that time, regarding efforts that the agency had made to bring new businesses to Oldham County. Other than that I would challenge anyone to show me something she has contributed to the court. Additionally, Iva Davis has voted in lockstep with Judge Murner on every issue that I can remember to include all tax and fee increases. She is a very nice lady and pleasant to talk with but she is not the right person to represent the people of the fifth magisterial district. Therefore, I endorse JD Sparks for magistrate for the fifth district. He is a young person who has fresh ideas, is not afraid to raise issues, and will bring a change to Fiscal Court.

Tomorrow I will have another countywide race endorsement and an endorsement for one magisterial district.

PAULA GISH FOUND TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THE HATCH ACT

2010-05-10T19:40:00.002-04:00

Today Paula Gish tendered her resignation from the position of Deputy County Judge/Executive to Judge Executive Duane Murner. She tendered her resignation as a result of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) having found that she had been in violation of the Hatch Act since she filed to run for the office of County Judge/Executive. Gish has been in violation for several months.

I brought the issue of Gish being in violation of the Hatch Act before the Oldham County Fiscal Court months ago and at that time I notified the court that I had filed a complaint with the OSC regarding the matter. At that same time Judge Murner indicated that he had also asked the OSC for an opinion on Gish’s position. It had been well known throughout county government circles that I had planned to file a complaint.

Gish indicated in her letter of resignation that she would be interested in serving as a consultant or in a part-time position until after the election. Considering the fact that she has been in violation for such a long period of time, I don’t believe that she should be considered for any position. To give her a job of any type would be a “slap in the face” to the residents of Oldham County. However, I fully expect her to be offered some type of position after the election on May 18, 2010. If she loses, she will be offered the position of Deputy Judge again. If she wins, she will be offered a part-time position or a consultant’s contract. Murner will find a way for her to receive a salary at the expense of the public. Ethics don’t seem to be a concern for this administration.

Just what is Gish qualified to do? The state auditor stated that she was not qualified to supervise the payroll clerk and the county doesn’t have any PTA positions. However, Murner is known to take care of his cronies. Remember, Bill Tucker, after losing in the primary election in 2006 and again in the November election in 2006 landed a job in county government after Murner laid off several other employees. Remember when Murner sued former Judge Mary Ellen Kinser over the appointment and subsequent attempt by Judge Kinser to remove Kevin Jeffries from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Murner was taking care of a friend there also. And don’t forget that Murner broke the law to keep from revealing that the Rawlings Foundation was the anonymous donor of $100,000 to the county. He even indicated that he would go to jail before he would reveal the name. However, when the time came for him to produce the name of the donor or go to jail, he chose not to go to jail. He had made a joint statement to the press that the donor was George Rawlings but when the cancelled check was produced it was revealed that the donor was the Rawlings Foundation instead of George Rawlings.

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SCOTT DAVIS STORY

2010-05-08T01:19:00.008-04:00

There are two sides to every story. Today Magistrate Scott Davis, of Oldham County, Kentucky, took the opportunity to tell his side of a story. As most you know Davis has been accused of failing to deliver Kentucky Derby tickets to people who purchased them from his company, Derby Deals.com. Actually, several news reports have stated that what he did was a “scam.” It has been stated that Davis’ company delivered over 800 tickets to customers – he did not take their money. If Davis were running a scam why would he have delivered tickets to any of his customers? Not one reporter has asked that question. Davis nor his company have had any charges, criminal or civil filed against them.

On Friday, May 7, 2010, DerbyDeals.com filed a lawsuit in Jefferson Circuit Court in Louisville, KY alleging that Steve Masiello, an assistant basketball coach with the University of Louisville men’s basketball program had agreed to purchase Kentucky Derby tickets for Davis’ company. Davis alleges that he gave Masiello $70,000 to purchase tickets for him but that Masiello did not supply him with all of the tickets that he was supposed to and only returned $10,000 of his money. In the complaint Davis alleges that Masiello claimed to him that he could use connections that he had, including Coach Rick Pitino, to obtain Derby tickets for him.

Davis has stated that he has refunded most of the money to the people that did not receive the tickets that they were supposed to receive and that he is in the process of returning the remainder of the funds.

In the lawsuit Davis is seeking compensatory and punitive damages from Masiello. Davis also alleges that Masiello had an accomplice known to him also by the name “Steve.” However, Davis does not appear to be seeking any damages from him as he alleges that he was dealing with Masiello. The entire lawsuit can be viewed by clicking here.

I attempted to contact Steve Masiello on May 5, 2010 regarding this entire incident. However, he did not return my calls but Attorney Larry Wilder did call me and stated that he represented Masiello. He stated that the allegations made by Davis were not true. However, when I tried to ask Wilder other questions he hung up the phone. For the record, Wilder is the attorney who was found asleep in a trash can after police had been called by neighbors when a man was seen asleep in a trash can. The incident took place in Jeffersonville, IN. At the time of that incident Wilder was a city attorney for the city of Jeffersonville, IN. He was not cited for the incident.

The timing of this entire incident is not good for any of the parties involved. Scott Davis is seeking re-election to his Magistrate seat in Oldham County, Kentucky and as the world knows, the University of Louisville basketball program has already received enough bad publicity due to Coach Rick Pitino’s involvement with Karen Sypher. In addition to all of that Samardo Samuels’ mother has stated that he will not return for his junior year and that he will enter the NBA draft. What else could happen?

DOES THE OLDHAM ERA GIVE FAIR AND BALANCED COVERAGE

2010-05-08T00:59:00.004-04:00

In the May 5, 2010 issue of the Oldham Era a huge story was written about Magistrate Scott Davis. The story was centered on an allegation, made by a woman from Texas, that Davis had taken money from her for Kentucky Derby tickets and then failed to deliver the tickets to her. However, he did deliver tickets to her for the Kentucky Oaks.

It appeared to me that the Oldham Era completely took the word of the woman although no charges had been filed against Davis. The management at the newspaper stated that they did try to contact Magistrate Davis but was unable to reach him. Therefore, the Era ran the story without any input from Davis. After all, a deadline had to be met and that was more important than getting both sides of the story.

It is true that the Era did try to contact Davis – at least the Era left a message for me stating that they wanted to talk to him. I relayed their message to Magistrate Scott Davis and his attorney, Thomas Clay, later spoke with the Oldham Era.

I spoke with Clay on Wednesday evening regarding the allegations. At that time he advised me that Steve Masiello, an assistant basketball coach with the University of Louisville men’s basketball program, had failed to deliver derby tickets to Magistrate Scott Davis after he had paid Masiello $70,000 for tickets that he was to deliver to his clients, including the woman from Texas. Clay also advised me that he had given this information to the Oldham Era earlier in the day and that the Era had told him that since their paper had already gone to press their web site would have an updated article regarding the incident.

I checked the Era web site on Wednesday night and no story regarding the incident was there. However, during a call Thursday night with Clarissa Williams, Managing Editor of the Era and Jackie Stoess Hack, the Editor of the Era, I was told that the site was updated with another story at 11:30am on Thursday. However, Masiello’s name was not mentioned. I asked why his name was not in the issue and I was told that no charges had been filed against him and that they were concerned because of liability.

Let’s take a look at this. Scott Davis had not been charged with anything, and still hasn’t, but yet the Era was willing to take the word of a person from Texas that she had been the victim of a scam and print a story. On the other hand, they were not willing to take the word of a local well known attorney and write a story about Steve Masiello. I believe that you get the picture.

I asked the Era if they had tried to contact Steve Masiello and they told me that they had not. I told them that I had called him so they obviously knew that I had his phone number but they didn’t bother to ask me for it. Could it be that they did not want to hear anything else or were they afraid to call him? I’ll let you be the judge of that.

One more issue to be considered is that Magistrate Scott Davis has not been accused of any crime by the police. On the other hand, Paula Gish, candidate for Oldham County Judge/Executive is being investigated for possibly having violated federal laws. Further, Kevin Eldridge has been sued for failing to comply with Kentucky’s open record laws and Judge Duane Murner has been found guilty of having violated those same open records laws. I doubt if as much was written by the Oldham Era about all of those cases combined as they wrote about Magistrate Davis.

Does it sound like I am trying to defend Davis? Well, I am. There is just an inequity here that bothers me. If Davis is charged with something and found guilty I believe that he should pay the penalty. However, until that happens he should be given the same consideration as other officials in the county.

Let us not forget that if it were not for this site, it is doubtful that anyone would have reported that Oldham County had been alleged to have violated the civil rights of a Shelby County police officer. There was a federal lawsuit filed and neither the Oldham Era nor the Courier-Journal reported about it until I reported it on this web site. Surely, if a tiny web site with nobody but me to report can find out these things you would think that a county-wide newspaper would know what is happening

Thus, does the Oldham Era give fair and balanced coverage? That is your call.

COMING SOON: BREAKING NEWS ABOUT MAGISTRATE SCOTT DAVIS

2010-05-07T12:50:00.003-04:00

Please visit this site later today for more news about Magistrate Scott Davis and the alleged ticket scam regarding Kentucky Derby tickets.

It is expected that a lawsuit will be filed regarding this matter this afternoon. If it is, I hope to have the lawsuit posted on this site.

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

2010-05-05T00:50:00.000-04:00

OLDHAM RESERVE CONTRACT APPROVED

2010-05-05T00:42:00.003-04:00

Oldham County Judge Executive Duane Murner announced in fiscal court on Tuesday, May 4, 2010 that a deal had been reached between the Oldham Lagrange Development Authority (OLDA) and the Hocker Group regarding the Oldham Reserve. No specifics of the contract were revealed. The Oldham Reserve consists of over 900 acres that the county purchased several years ago for the purpose of having commercial businesses and residential housing in the same area. The county has not been successful with the venture and it has become a financial drain on the county coffers. The county has been trying for a long time to obtain a partner to assume some of the financial and managerial responsibility for the land. As of now Oldham Reserve has one tenant, the Rawlings Group.

I had predicted several weeks before this announcement that the announcement would be made close to election time in order to enhance the position of the incumbents. Now the question is, will the contract be available for review by the public and all candidates for public office in sufficient time prior to the election for the issue to be discussed?

I listened as many of the magistrates praised OLDA for its work in achieving this contract. I would dare say that none of the magistrates have seen the contract. This is a very typical response of many of the magistrates on this court. They have frequently voted for things about which they knew nothing and then complained later that they were misled by the County Judge or some other person. Frankly, I see most of the magistrates believing that the responsibility for the Oldham Reserve has been lifted from their shoulders. However, the fact is that those magistrates on the court who originally voted to purchase the Oldham Reserve will always be responsible for that action. It will be very interesting to see just what concessions the county had to make in order to get someone to sign a contract.

There will be more to follow on this issue.

WESTPORT DEBATES

2010-05-05T00:21:00.003-04:00

Monday night I had a choice, go to the Lagrange City Council meeting or attend the debate/forum in Westport. Knowing that there would be more City Council meetings throughout the year and that this would be the last debate between most of the officials running for elective office, I decided to attend the debates in Westport. Keep in mind that this was the third set of debates that I had attended. I don't know what happened at the City Council meeting but I do know that I did not learn anything new at Westport.

Most things do not change. Paula Gish still needed her note cards to say the same thing that she said on several previous occasions and the candidates' opening and closing remarks were the same as they had given at prior debates/forums. The questions were very general and for the most part did not relate to the candidate or the office that the candidate was seeking. This made for a very boring event. I would like to see a debate between candidates seeking just one or two offices and I would like to see each candidate given an opportunity to ask his or her opponent three to five questions with each person having a rebuttal period. I believe that might lead to different topics being discussed at each debate. The way these debates have been handled essentially allows each candidate an opportunity to tell a story and leave out the unpleasant parts.

Much of the time was spent by candidates telling what they thought about Westport and what they thought should be done for Westport. It was refreshing to see Bob Leslie, who now represents the Westport area, to be simply honest with people. He stated that the people do not want more taxes and therefore they're just simply is not enough money to do everything that everyone wants. Leslie listed several of the accomplishments that he had achieved for the Westport area. Among those accomplishments were the resurfacing of several roads and the rehabilitation of the park in Westport.

All that said, I would be remiss if I did not give the folks of Westport recognition for their hospitality. Without question the atmosphere was extremely pleasant. Attendees were given the choice of several different cookies and tea or lemonade. The Westport people showed some old-fashioned hospitality and I, for one, certainly appreciated that hospitality.

CANDIDATES FOR OLDHAM COUNTY JUDGE DEBATE

2010-04-23T16:14:00.004-04:00

Thursday night the Oldham County Chamber of Commerce and the Oldham Era sponsored a debate between the candidates for the office of Oldham County Judge. There were more than 150 people in attendance. Although several issues were discussed I did not hear any solutions.

The participants were given the identity of the topics, but not the questions, prior to the debate. Thus, the participants were well prepared for their opening and closing remarks.

When asked what they would do to assist local businesses to receive business from the county government both candidates essentially said the same; that is, that most bids are required to meet legal criteria and that the county usually is required to accept the lowest bid. I saw virtually no difference in their respective responses. Whoever proposed this question surely didn’t believe that one of the candidates would be so stupid as to say he/she would give all of the available work to local business whether the local business was the lowest bidder or not.

The second issue presented to the candidates was the balancing of the budget. Essentially, Gish did not have an answer to the question. She reiterated how the present administration had balanced the budget. In her attempt to describe what they had done she stated that the staff had been reduced by 15%. However, she did not mention all of the increases in taxes and the county’s failure to pay its bills. (The county only paid the interest on some of its debt to save money and spent the money in other non-essential places such as funding the Chamber of Commerce.) The only prospective thing that she said was, that she would ask all of the department heads to try to cut their budgets.

Voegele stated his review of the proposed income for the coming year reflects that the income will remain about the same while expenditures would increase by about 500 thousand dollars due to inflation. His idea was to cut back on some purchases such as police vehicles. Voegele did mention that the current administration had doubled the insurance premium tax to help with balancing the budget.

The issue of Oldham Reserve was the basis of the next question. Voegele said that the interest on the outstanding balance of Oldham Reserve is $14,000 per week. He stated that something has to be done but that failure is not an option. Voegele said that he did not support an occupational tax.

Gish stated that the county has an opportunity to sell the land. However, as far as I know the only prospective buyer is Talmadge Hocker and he won’t purchase it without an interchange on I-71 and that may take a long time to get, if ever. And he will only be purchasing a small portion of the land. The fact is, the Oldham Reserve is a “white elephant” that just doesn’t seem to go away in spite of the efforts of the Murner-Gish administration’s efforts to keep it from being brought up publicly. Gish also stated that failure was not an option. Gish did state that the county has an agreement with Hocker. That is the first time that I had heard that. Coincidentally, I had asked LaGrange Mayor Elsie Carter on Wednesday if the deal with Hocker had been closed and she told me that as far as she knew, it had not been closed.

One troubling thing I gleaned from the debate was that both candidates stated that the failure of the Oldham Reserve was not an option. However, I would say that failure is more than just a mere possibility and nobody seems to be thinking about that. If you don’t think about it, and you don’t plan for it, you will be in big trouble if it does fail. Nobody had a solution.

Since it is going to be taxpayer money that pays for the infrastructure of Oldham Reserve, and the interchange alone will be at least twenty-six million dollars, perhaps the county should consider forming a public corporation made up of Oldham County residents and allow them to buy shares in the corporation. Then the corporation could hire good management for the to promote and sell the land. The corporation would then develop the land under the guidelines that are already in place. The county would get out from under the burden of the debt and the taxpayers who invest in the new corporation would have an opportunity to get some of their tax dollars back.

Gish also stated that she does not support an occupational tax. However, I have heard other people in the Murner-Gish administration say that an occupational tax is absolutely the key to diversifying the tax base in Oldham County and that an occupational tax is necessary for additional industry to make a difference in the tax base. I happen to agree with that. That is why I do not understand why we have gotten the county into such a mess if we are not willing to either place a tax on the businesses or to implement an occupation tax. Please, someone tell me how any industry will help the tax base if you don’t get any additional tax money through the businesses!

Paula Gish touted the fact that The Rawlings Group now has 121 employees who live in Oldham County. She thought that was great. I don’t know if that means that they have hired that many people who reside in the county or if it means that many of their employees have moved to Oldham County. Either way does not matter. There is absolutely no basis for this county to be trying to get additional people to move to the county. Until the recession came about there were already more people coming to the county than the infrastructure could support. Thus, I don’t understand why Gish was so proud of that figure.

Voegele did add that he favored the creation of “incubator businesses.” That would be the creation small businesses that demonstrate the capability of growing. That would not cost the county huge amounts of money to support. Once again though, without additional taxes those business won’t change the tax base.

The issue of the Oldham County Development Authority (OCEDA) was not brought up. The fact is, it has essentially been a failure. I remember hearing the director of OCEDA admitting that very little had been done in several years to promote growth in Oldham County. He resigned a short time after making that statement.

Gish said that the county should financially support the Chamber of Commerce. Why should taxpayers give sparse tax dollars to an agency that has not brought industry to the county? If you want to help balance the budget, cut the funding to the chamber.

Gish stated that the county needs to expand the tax base but she gave no ideas on how to do that. The fact is, neither candidate had an idea on how to expand the tax base. Remember, industry won’t diversify the tax base unless some tax is placed upon the business or its employees.

Both candidates stated that they would work with other government officials to push forward for the I-71 interchange. However, neither candidate said what he/she would do if the interchange could not be secured. I have a difficult time believing that the federal government will build an interchange that has nothing at the end of it and connects to a two-lane road. However, stranger things have happened.

I was startled to learn that no questions were asked regarding development in the county or open government. Frankly, I believe that the questions were intentionally omitted. There could be no other justification.

I attended the forum in Brownsboro earlier in the month. In that forum the questions came from those in attendance and there were many questions regarding development. Further, I hear from a lot of people throughout Oldham County and I can say with certainty that the issue of development is one of the top three issues on the minds of people, if not the top issue. Anyone sponsoring a debate could not leave out that topic out unless they intended to do so. It is well known that the developers are the driving force behind Paula Gish. Could it be that that group had influence on the debate? I know a lot of people believe that to be the situation.

As for a discussion on an open government, everyone knows that the Murner-Gish administration has been less than forthright when asked for information. Once again, this is a topic that I don’t believe Gish wanted to tackle.

As I recently said before Fiscal Court, I did not believe that the debate would be fair. I continue to believe that the debate was not fair in that two of the most important issues were left out of the debate. I stand by my earlier statements.

David Voegele did voice his displeasure regarding the omission of any questions regarding development. And, he stated that, if elected, he would conduct the government’s business in public.

You may have noticed that I have frequently used the term “Murner-Gish Administration.” The reason is that in her closing remarks, Gish stated that she had been endorsed by the current Judge/Executive, Duane Murner. She has set the stage although most people have known that they are/were both funded in large part by the same contributors.

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES FOR COUNTY ATTORNEY DEBATE

2010-04-23T00:48:00.003-04:00

On April 22, 2010 a debate was held between the two Republican candidates for the office of the Oldham County Attorney. The participants were Galen Clark and the incumbent, John Fendley.

Several topics were discussed and each candidate was given an opportunity to give closing remarks. Early in the debate Fendley stated that he had spoken in opposition of the smoking ban and the airport. Clark replied that he did not believe that the County Attorney should leave his seat on the Fiscal Court to speak in the “public comment” portion of the Fiscal Court meetings.

Clark accused Fendley of having given “bad advice” to the County Clerk on the petition that was circulated by the Patriot II group regarding the increase in school taxes. Clark said that advice could cost the school board several million dollars as a lawsuit ensued against the school board. Fendley responded that the issue did not involve Fiscal Court. However, Fendley did not say that giving legal advice to the County Clerk was not a part of his job.

Fendley stated that his most important responsibility to the public was to protect their rights and property. Clark alleged that Fendley too often gave probation to repeat offenders. Fendley did not respond to that allegation.

Fendley stated that his office is one of the top offices in the state in pursuing child support offenders. Clark responded that the state gives Fendley’s office $199,000 each year to prosecute child support cases. This money is in addition to the normal funds that a County Attorney’s office receives

Clark said that if he were elected, he would work with the schools to promote programs to prevent juvenile crime. He claimed that Fendley had not been involved with the schools since 1999. Both candidates support the use of school resource officers, however, Fendley claimed that the resource officers were both an enforcement and a training tool. Clark, on the other hand, claimed that he would rely on his office to give instructions to the students more than he would the resource officers.

Additionally, Clark said that he would set up a web site to educate the students and that he would like to get students educated about crime. On the other hand, Fendley said that students were educated by their peers who had come in contact with the law. My comment to that would be, who would you rather have teaching your child which course in life to follow, a professional person or a student who had gained his/her experience only through contact with the law?

In his closing remarks Fendley said the County needs a person with experience instead of someone who sits in an ivory tower and criticizes other people.

Clark said he would not be running for the office if he thought the current administration was doing a good job.

While Clark certainly has some good ideas and a different approach to punishing people who commit crimes he has an uphill battle in his attempt to unseat Fendley. Fendley has been in office for a long time and knows a lot of people. He made a point of letting people know that his family had resided in the county for several generations. I hear several candidates try to take advantage of the fact that their family has been in the county for decades. Considering how the demographics of Oldham County have changed over the past thirty years I am not sure whether that is a positive or negative asset.

.

STUDY REVIEW COMMITTEE FORWARDS ROAD CLASSIFICATION TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

2010-04-22T10:43:00.001-04:00

On Wednesday night the Study Review Committee (SRC) held a public meeting in order to listen to comments from the public about the Oldham County Road Functional Classifications. The SRC was formed by the Oldham County Planning and Development Commission. The chairman of the committees is Kevin Jeffries.

Several people were in attendance and most of them were from the US 42 corridor. First and foremost on their minds were the planned “collector” roads that were designated as a result of the SRC work. None of the people from that area spoke in favor of the planned roads.

Some of the residents thought that once a line was drawn on a map indicating that road was planned for an area the value of their property could be affected negatively. Some thought that some of the roads presented safety and environmental issues. And, Bill Landes, a horse farmer, voiced his fear that the planned roads would damage an already fragile equine industry.

Members of the committee said that the planned roads were necessary in order to plan for future development. The committee also stated that just because an area was designated as a location for a road in the future, a road would not be built unless the area was developed. The committee added that if the people did not sell their land there would not be any developments and therefore no roads.

One has to question the need to plan for collector roads in the area of US 42 when a huge increase in traffic on US 42 would definitely create safety issues unless improvements were made to the highway. There was testimony last night that there are not any long-range plans in place to significantly improve US42.

Despite the assurances from the SRC that the fact that the roads were planned did not mean that they would ever be built the people in attendance were definitely doubtful. That is a clear indication that the public does not trust the government. A recent national poll indicated that over 75% of the people do not trust their government. We are now seeing that at a local level.

One positive thing that I noticed at the meeting was the way Chairman Kevin Jeffries conducted the meeting. He was thoughtful and treated the people with respect. Each person wanting to speak was allowed four minutes. Even though the time for people to speak was over and the committee was in the discussion phase of the meeting Jeffries did allow a couple of comments from the public. While that may not have been following the normal procedure it was the right thing to do and the meeting never was out of control. For that Jeffries is to be commended. However, I would recommend that the people be afforded an opportunity to speak again after hearing the discussion of the committee as new issues are often raised in that phase of the meeting.

The SRC removed the line from the map for the North Buckeye Lane/Shiloh Lane collector road. However, the language describing the road was left in the text of the plan. Thus, the removal of the line from the map is nothing more than an attempt to placate a few people. The proposed collector road connecting a new I-71 interchange with US 42 was removed as it conflicts with the Brownsboro Conservation Plan. However, I must admit that the language used to remove that was not clear to me. Hopefully this will be more clearly stated in the future.

At the conclusion of the meeting the committee voted to forward their recommended plan, with minor changes, to the full Planning and Development Commission. The commission will have a public hearing on the plan on May 25, 2010 at 9am.

WHERE IS THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT FOR GISH

2010-04-21T17:03:00.002-04:00

I recently checked the web site for the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance to see how much money Paula Gish had received during the most recent reporting period. The report covered the time period from January 1, 2010 through April 16, 2010. Considering that she had received almost $58,000 prior to the beginning of this reporting period one would have expected much more money to be forthcoming. However, during this latest reporting period she claims to have only received $1481.70.

There has been a lot of discussion in the public about the amount of money that she has received and the sources of that money. Many people believe that it is obscene. Could it be that her contributors have been told to wait until after this reporting period to make their contributions to avoid the contributions showing up on this report? Frankly, I suspect that is the situation. There is another report due fifteen days prior to the election. I expect to see the contributions take a significant rise during that time period. When all of the reports are filed, and some of them are due after the primary election, I suspect that there will be a lot more money coming from those people connected to the development industry.

Watch for many more “mailers” from her as well as heavy newspaper and television advertisement. All of that costs money. You certainly will not hear Gish say that she will not take any more money from those with ties to the development industry as those people are her bread and butter.

Hopefully someone will compare her expenditures and receipts. If she follows in the footsteps of her mentor, she will have many more receipts and expenditures. And, losing is just not an option for the people who need her in office.

MOST QUALIFIED

2010-04-21T00:49:00.001-04:00

CLICK ON PICTURE TO VIEW FULL SCREEN

MAGISTRATE DAVIS HOLDS SUCCESSFUL MEET AND GREET WITH CONSTITUENTS

2010-04-20T13:02:00.003-04:00

On April 19th Magistrate Scott Davis gave his constituents an opportunity to meet him and question him on any issue. While doing that the constituents also had an opportunity to enjoy some good food. The event was held at the John Black Community Center in Buckner.

Davis had to consider the event a success as every person (couple) that was in attendance seemed to pick up a yard sign on the way out the door. One lady forgot to pick up a yard sign as she left. However, I was in the parking lot after the meeting was over and she returned and wanted to know where she could pick up a sign. She followed me to my house and I gave her the sign that I had in my yard. The lady told me that Davis had impressed her by taking all questions and allowing everyone the opportunity to voice their opinion without being interrupted. One man in attendance told that although he always voted he had never attended any political event before last night. It was refreshing to see that some people are taking an interest in their government who normally do not do so.

Many of the issues that are facing the county were discussed. Among those was the consolidation of the police departments in the county. As one might expect there was support for keeping them separate and there was support for consolidating them and people gave various reasons to support their position. I can guarantee one thing and that is, if the issue is ever taken up by the fiscal court, it will get a lot of input from the public.

Once again Magistrate Scott Davis proved that he gets better attendance at his meetings than the County government gets from county-wide meetings.

ASK THE CANDIDATES WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE INFRASTRUCTURE

2010-04-19T11:10:00.003-04:00

I have been to three forms in Oldham County to listen to various candidates for political office and have spoken with several other candidates about the issues in Oldham County. Development is always one of those issues that is discussed and the only thing that is discussed is, do we want development, how do we control development and what kind of development do we want? The missing question is, who is going to pay for the infrastructure to support development? With the exception of one candidate the candidates are not even bringing up the subject of who pays for the infrastructure.

Everybody assumes we will have development and it is beginning to look like everybody assumes that the ordinary taxpayer will continue to have the burden placed upon him to pay for the infrastructure that supports development. The question for the average person is, what will development to do for you? Will 100 new homes make you any more money, will 100 new homes improve your educational system, will 100 new homes give you better fire protection or police protection? If your answer to all of these questions is no, then why would you want more development? Let's think about some other things that more development will do for you. It will most definitely make each trip that you take to the city of Lagrange, to a local school, and to work a longer, more time-consuming trip.

However, it seems as though almost every politician is willing to accept more development. They excuse it by saying that they will manage it. Why do they not discuss who will pay for it? Because they are afraid of stepping on the toes of the developers. As long as that attitude continues you will have unmanaged development in this county and you will pay for it-not the developers.

Quite frankly, I have been very disappointed in all the candidates so far. What is worse is that I don't see any desire for them to change. Magistrate Scott Davis, throughout his term in office has suggested that fees be increased for builders in older to take some of the burden from the taxpayers. Of course the administration would not hear of this and none of the other magistrates joined with him.

The next time that you speak to one of your representatives be sure to ask them if you are going to have to continue to pay for the infrastructure to support developers.

If I can keep from getting sick at my stomach, I am going to write an article about the taxpayer money that is going to be spent on Oldham Reserve in order to improve the property so that a developer will take it off our hands. Just a little peek, the exit is expected to cost the taxpayers 26 million dollars. Wouldn’t you like to purchase a couple of hundreds acres and then have the taxpayers spend that much money just to improve it for you?

BROWNSBORO FORUM

2010-04-15T22:53:00.005-04:00

The Brownsboro Conservation Group hosted a forum at Fox Hollow for the candidates for Oldham County Judge/Executive, Property Valuation Administrator, County Attorney and three magisterial districts. The attendance for the event was outstanding as there was standing room only. I believe that the response was better than expected by the host. It was certainly better than I expected.

The host was gracious enough to allow me to tape the entire program. I have yet to review the tape but I made some interesting observations while there.

Nobody accused Paula Gish of taking money from developers in return for favors; however, she must have a guilty conscious as she remarked that she was offended that anyone would think that she would accept contributions from anyone for the promise of a favor. She has good reason to have a guilty conscious unless she believes that the people of Oldham County are all naïve or stupid.

After all, a huge amount of Gish’s contributions have come from “special interest” groups. Everyone knows that the contributors expect something in return. Does she really believe that the public does not see through that?

Then there was Rick Rash being his usual obnoxious self. Rash just seemed to want to find fault with most of the questions that were asked of him as though the person who formed the question was an idiot and that it was his duty to inform everyone. Mr. Rash just can’t seem to keep from being condescending to people. He also made several statements about achievements that the county has made since he has been a magistrate. On the other hand, he didn’t tell the people how he had voted for every tax increase – including the doubling of the insurance premium tax.

At least Bob Deibel did not try to show the people in attendance that he was smarter than they were. As usual, he was very polite. However, he did say that he had done everything that Rash did, implicating that he was entitled to the same accolades. Yes, he voted for all of those tax increases also.

The forum made one thing clear. Gish is, and has been, in lockstep with the Murner administration. She made that perfectly clear. However, I believe that a review of her campaign contributions had already erased any doubt that people had about that.

WHAT MAKES A CANDIDATE THE MOST QUALIFIED

2010-04-06T00:48:00.000-04:00

Duane Murner claims that Paula Gish is the most qualified person in the county to be the County Judge/Executive. One cannot help but wonder on what basis he makes that finding.

Certainly Gish is not as well educated as many people in Oldham County. She has an Associate’s Degree. Lest we forget Judge Murner really touted his Harvard degree when he was running for County Judge/Executive. Certainly she does not have an outstanding work history. She has stated that she was a part-time secretary for twenty-five years before becoming the County Deputy Judge/Executive. She has some experience as a member of PTAs. Although that is a worthwhile organization, the experience ones gains in that organization at the local level hardly qualifies one to be a County Judge/Executive. And, Gish was a magistrate for several years. I am sure that she cast votes on many matters before the court during that time but I cannot remember any significant issue that she championed. Further, casting votes does not make a person the most qualified candidate for any office.

It appears that the best experience that Gish would have to offer would be her experience as the Deputy County Judge/Executive. Thus, allow me to take a look at her work in that area. During the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2008 the Payroll Officer for the Oldham County Fiscal Court reported to the Deputy County Judge/Executive who was Gish. In an audit performed by the Kentucky State Auditor the auditor stated that there were “material weaknesses” in the internal control over the payroll. The auditor stated that the “payroll officer does not report to an individual knowledgeable of the payroll system and process.” In other words, Paula Gish was not knowledgeable of the payroll system and process. But, wait a minute, this is the most qualified person in the county. Well, maybe she just became the most qualified person in the last eighteen months.

As a result of the findings the auditor recommended that the payroll officer should report to the Chief Financial Officer. However, in his reply to the audit, Judge Murner stated that the payroll officer would continue reporting to the Deputy Judge/Executive (Gish).

In my opinion, Paula Gish would be violating the terms of the Hatch Act if she were supervising the control and use of federal funds. Murner claims that she is not violating the Hatch Act. Therefore, she must not be supervising those funds. If she were not qualified to oversee the payroll officer for the county, the taxpayers should be happy that she is not overseeing federal funds.

Anyway, all residents of the county can take comfort in the fact that they have the most qualified candidate in Paula Gish, that is, according to Judge Murner.

The audit for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008 can be found at oldhamcounty.net. The material referenced in this article can be found beginning with page five of the report.

2010-04-06T00:39:00.005-04:00

Did Mayor Carter trade her golf cart for this?

SCOTT BLACK IS BACK ONLINE

2010-03-20T12:35:00.005-04:00

After an eight month hiatus Oldham County resident Scott Black has fired up his blog once again. Scott presents his material in a "down home" fashion. You will find his articles to be interesting.

You can find Scott's site here.

MORE ON OPEN RECORDS AND ANONYMOUS DONOR

2010-03-17T15:30:00.002-04:00

The issue of the “anonymous donor” to Oldham County came up once again at he March 2, 2010 meeting of the Oldham County Fiscal Court. Once again Duane Murner demonstrated that he does not understand the law. Or, perhaps he wants to mislead the people of Oldham County. Does he really believe that the people of Oldham County are stupid and ignorant? The people of Oldham County should be appalled that he tries to mislead them.

Murner once again stated that he was willing to accept the “consequences” of refusing to obey a court order in the case of George Rawlings. He said that he was saved from that fate when George Rawlings decided to publicly identify himself as the anonymous donor to Oldham County.

The time has come to clarify the issue of the identity of the anonymous donor to Oldham County. Although George Rawlings has stated that he was the donor and he DID sign the check that was received by the county, the fact is that he was NOT the donor. The donor was the Rawlings Foundation. The Rawlings Foundation is a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt foundation.(Click here for Foundation information) There has never been any evidence produced that George Rawlings did, or did not, contribute any money to that foundation. The by-laws of the foundation allow it to collect money from many sources, including employees. Before Judge Murner nominates George Rawlings for sainthood he needs to be sure who should be given such status. To view a copy of the actual check written by the foundation click here.

Now the grand finale, in Fiscal Court on March 16, 2010 Murner stated that George Rawlings and the Rawlings are indistinguishable. Can you believe that? I doubt that the Internal Revenue Service would view the two as indistinguishable and I doubt that anyone else would either. Murner was caught misleading the public and thought that he had to say something.

More on open records, Magistrate Scott Davis recently wanted to see some public records in the possession of county government. Instead of allowing him to view the records (he is a publicly elected official), Murner required him to file an Open Records Request any ordinary citizen would be required to do. In open fiscal court Magistrate Scott Davis questioned Murner as to the time that he was taking to produce the documents. Murner responded by stating the following: "The requirements for a request for open records is that you acknowledge receipt of the request for open records within three days …”

For the record, the following is a quote from the Kentucky Open Records law: “Under most circumstances, agencies must make public records available within three days.” What is difficult to understand about this? Further, in a decision of the Kentucky Attorney General dated January 9, 2008 (AG 09-ORD-004) the Attorney stated, “Although KRS 61.872(5) permits an agency to extend the three day deadline for response if the requested records are "in active use, in storage or not otherwise available," the statute does not permit an agency to extend the deadline while it secures the services of an attorney.” In another opinion (AG 96-ORD-168) the Attorney General stated, “We also find that any open records policy which impedes access to nonexempt public records by more than three working days violates provisions of the Act.” These quotes clearly state that it is the intent of the Open Records Act that the material must be available in three days in most situations.

Murner would like the public to believe that the law only requires that he acknowledge receipt of the request within three days. For a person with a Harvard degree he apparently does not read well. I can assure him that though most of the people in Oldham received their degrees from a college or university other than Harvard, or may not have a college education, they are smart enough to understand the language presented here. Thankfully, this county has less than a year left to endure his misleading statements.

WHO CONTROLS OLDHAM COUNTY AND WHY

2010-03-14T17:26:00.013-04:00

Developers are the driving force behind Oldham County. For that reason it is easy to see that any political race in the county centers around the issue of development even though many people do not see it. There are many other issues but they are all related to development.

As everyone knows “special interest” groups have a huge impact on the politics of any political race. In Jefferson County there are many such groups. Some of those are medical groups, sports interests, those with a special interest in education, UPS, Ford, General Electric, the development industry, including realtors, and many more. They tend to keep each other in “check” to a certain extent. However, there are really only two special interest groups in Oldham County. One of those is interested in education and the other is the group that is interested in promoting development in the county. To some extent the development group is also focused on the education in Oldham County as a good educational system helps sell their homes. But the county really does not have a special interest group to keep the development industry in check.

Since the educational system has evolved to the point that there are not any huge issues with it, the developers have taken center stage and have become the most driving force in the county. Without question the developers control Oldham County. The most visible developer in the county is Bob Jones and he is the driving force behind politics and development in Oldham County. A review of the last race for County Judge/Executive as well as the present race for the same position gives clear evidence of that. Most Republicans just can’t see the forest for the trees.

Why is it so important to developers to have control of the office of County Judge/Executive and as many magistrates as possible? The answer is quite simple. In order for development to flourish certain systems must be in place. There must be good schools, adequate sewers, a good water supply in areas prime for development and good roads.

As for the sewer district, the members of the district are appointed by the County Judge and approved by the fiscal court. In the present state of the fiscal court that means that the nominee of the Judge/Executive will be approved as the only two magistrates to oppose many of the Judge’s nominees have been Scott Davis and David Voegele. At the present time the sewer district has severe financial problems. An annual audit is required for the sewer district and one has not been competed for 2009 as of this date. Despite this, at the urging of Judge Murner, the Fiscal Court recently voted to assume responsibility for the outstanding bonds of the sewer district. That will allow the district to have a better credit rating thereby allowing the district to borrow more money to expand the sewers that would be beneficial to the developers. Remember that the developers need sewers in order to build homes on small lots.

Water is of the utmost importance to developers. The water district, whose members are also appointed by the County Judge, decides where new water lines are to be built. You may have noticed an increase in your water bill recently. That is because the water district recently increased the fees by twenty-eight percent. They openly stated that the additional money was needed to increase water availability for new development. If you are a developer and own land without a water supply, just think how much more valuable the land becomes if water suddenly becomes available at no cost to you. Pretty good deal, especially when the present ratepayers are footing the bill.

Finally, the developers need roads in order that there is sufficient access to their developments. For that they turn to both the county and state. Within the county is found the Planning and Development Commission (PDC). It is to be noted that the former name of this agency was “Planning and Zoning”. I suppose that their desire is to do more development than zoning. In any event, the PDC has a lot of control over the planning of proposed roads. As an example, the PDC recently released a study titled “Road Functional Classification and Proposed Future Roads.” The study is available here. The paper states that there are three classifications of roads in Oldham County. They are interstate, arterial and collector roads. According to the report the county has one interstate, five arterial roads and forty-seven collector roads.

In the Outlook 2020 Comprehensive Plan five roads were proposed for Oldham County. Now, the PDC has decided that an additional six collector roads are needed. All six roads have been determined to be necessary to assist in development of respective areas. Areas for these roads were chosen based on potential for future growth and would provide roadway connectivity within Oldham County. Areas of future growth were identified with parcels greater than 20 acres and not currently in an agricultural protection district or public use. I wonder if they consulted with the landowners who would be affected by these roads before they made their decisions. Two landowners who are very unhappy with the proposed roads have contacted me. They are the partial owners of Holiday Farm. The farm has been in the family for over fifty years. In the highway 42 area these collector roads will have a huge impact on the equine industry and the picturesque farms adjacent to route 42.

As previously stated, the PDC is very influential in deciding where new roads are to be constructed. The members are appointed to that commission in large part by the County Judge/Executive.

As you can see, control over a small number of utility districts and the PDC is vital to the development industry. The easiest way to control them is to influence/control the office of the County Judge/Executive. Considering the importance of that office one can easily see why the developers and other people, whose livelihood is dependent on the success of the development industry, donated thousands of dollars to the last political campaign of Judge Duane Murner and have already donated thousands of dollars to the campaign of Paula Gish.

During the last campaign for County Judge/Executive Duane Murner received over thirty-seven thousand dollars from people whom I consider would be in a position to profit from unfettered development in Oldham County. The document identifying those donors can be viewed here. According to my calculation the campaign of Paula Gish has received over sixteen thousand dollars from people who would stand to profit from unfettered development. That document can be reviewed by clicking here. The source information for both of these documents can be found by going to the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance web site and searching that database by name. IT IS EXPECTED that Gish will collect several more thousands of dollars before the campaign is over. These figures do not reflect all of the money that was donated; only money that I believe was given by people who would stand to profit by more development.

What will more development do for you? Perhaps it will give you a longer trip to work, overcrowd your children’s classrooms, result in higher school taxes, higher water bills, higher sewer bills and a reduced quality of life. Do you want to sacrifice that for the sake of the developers?

On September 17, 2009 Paula Gish, currently a candidate for the Republican nomination for County Judge, held a fundraiser. Twenty-two women sponsored the fundraiser. Of those twelve had close ties to Bob Jones. Additionally, over half of the women who sponsored Gish cannot vote for her in the primary election as they are democrats.

In summary, I believe that Bob Jones is the most influential person in Oldham County. Moreover, although a democrat, he is the most influential person in the Republican Party. Considering voter registration it would appear that Oldham County is controlled by Republicans. However, I believe that the Republican Party and the county are controlled by one democrat, Bob Jones, by virtue of the large sums of money donated by him and those people close to him.

Republicans need to wake up and take back control of their party. Also, the residents of Oldham County need to take back their county. This county needs new leadership. Hopefully the people will do their “spring cleaning” on May 18, 2010.

FORMER JUDGE KINSER UPDATES OLDHAM FISCAL COURT

2010-03-07T18:20:00.001-05:00

Former Oldham County Judge/Executive, Mary Ellen Kinser, appeared before Fiscal Court on March 2nd, 2010 to give the court an update on the Kim Likens lawsuit. Kinser stated that the case began in 2003 when Likens alleged that Kinser fired her due to medical problems.

Kinser stated that she and the Oldham County fiscal court had prevailed at the Circuit Court level, the appellate court level, and finally at the Kentucky Supreme Court level. Likens had asked the Kentucky State Supreme Court for a rehearing which the court initially granted. However, the Supreme Court subsequently reversed its decision and denied the motion to reopen the case.

Apparently the decision on the lawsuit is now final unless Likens were to once again successfully petition the Supreme Court for a rehearing. This is another example of how slow the wheels of justice can turn.

WHAT ELSE COULD ELDRIDGE SAY

2010-03-03T20:27:00.007-05:00

As everyone who follows this site already knows, Kevin Eldridge, director of the Storm water district, was recently named the defendant in a lawsuit filed by Magistrate Scott Davis. Davis alleged that he filed an open records request for certain materials, to include all proposals, made by the Veolia Water Company to the Oldham County Storm water district for assuming the responsibilities of the district. Davis alleges that Eldridge, in his role as director of the storm water district, failed to turn over all requested materials. Eldridge is now trying to obscure the real issue of a violation of law.

In an article found in the neighborhood section of the Louisville Courier-Journal dated March 3rd, 2010, Eldridge stated that he was never specifically asked to turn over a “bound copy" of proposals. What is the difference between “bound” proposals and any other kind of proposals? When a person asked for all proposals obviously the person wanted all proposals, including bound proposals.

According to the same article Eldridge now wants to blame politics for the lawsuit. What else could he say? It appears that he was caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Could he say that Magistrate Davis was lying? Obviously not, the lawsuit spoke for itself as did the open records request made by Magistrate Davis.

Eldridge even went so far as to say that the courts could get much more done if they didn't have to bother with politics and posturing. Is he trying to say that when he violates the law he should go unpunished? Is he trying to say that if he is punished for violating the law, that it is politics? Someone please help Mr. Eldridge. If he believes that he is above the law, he needs help.

Eldridge now states that the requested material is now in the hands of attorney Stuart Ulferts. Why has Mr. Eldridge not simply turned the material over to Magistrate Davis? Could it be that Mr. Eldridge is hiding behind Ulferts and using him as a buffer?

Please Mr. Eldridge, quit using the term “politics” to cover your fallacy. Is that going to be your response every time that you don’t like something that is said in the upcoming political race? Or perhaps we should not call it a political race because you consider “politics” to be an exaggerated four-letter word?

IS GISH IN VIOLATION OF THE HATCH ACT:YOU READ: YOU DECIDE

2010-03-03T17:20:00.007-05:00

At the Oldham County Fiscal Court meeting conducted on March 2nd, 2010 I brought up the issue of the Hatch Act. The reason for doing so is that there are two Oldham County employees who are running for partisan office. Oldham County Deputy Judge/Executive Paula Gish is seeking the Republican nomination for Oldham County judge . Meanwhile, Stuart Ulferts is seeking the Democratic nomination for County Attorney.

The report that I furnished to the Oldham County Fiscal Court was prepared by the personnel department of Delaware County NY. To view that report click here. I have obtained the position description pertaining to Gish. You may view that description by clicking here. You can view the alleged position description of Stewart Ulferts by clicking here. I use the term “alleged” because what I received is the poorest excuse for a position description that I have ever seen. I believe that any reader looking at that description will agree if he/she has any experience with position descriptions. I have made this material available for my readers in order that each individual can reach an independent conclusin regarding this matter.

Without going into detail I will simply state that Oldham County has received many federal grants and a lot of federal funds. A review of Gish's position description reflects that she supervises 10 other supervisors in the County. I am only aware of 10 supervisors in the County; therefore, it follows that Gish has supervisory authority for everything that goes on in the County. Further, Gish acts in behalf of Judge/Executive Murner in his absence. Obviously I am not the final authority on this issue. However, it appears to me that Gish is in violation of the Hatch Act.

At yesterday's court meeting Judge Murner indicated that he had asked the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) for an opinion on the matter. Statements that he made during the meeting left me with the impression that if he is not happy with the decision of the OSC, he intends to litigate the issue. As has been indicated in the past by Murner's actions if he is not happy with the opinion of a non-judicial entity, he will not abide by the decision. Therefore, it is very likely that a final decision on this issue will not be forthcoming immediately. For the record, let me state that I have also asked the OSC for an opinion on the issue.

If the OSC finds that Gish is in violation of the Hatch Act, Gish should either resign from her position as Deputy County Judge/Executive or she should withdraw from the race for the Republican nomination for County Judge/Executive.

OLDHAM ERA STOPS SHORT OF THE FULL STORY ONCE AGAIN

2010-02-20T23:08:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, while traveling and surfing the internet, I decided to check the online version of the Oldham Era. It was the first time that I had read anything from the Era for months as I stopped my subscription over a year ago. Once again I was reminded why I no longer choose to receive the Era. The quality of their reporting is simply less than what you would find in a high school newspaper.

In the Wednesday edition there was an article about Magistrate Scott Davis having filed a lawsuit against Kevin Eldridge who is the chairman of the Stormwater district. They interviewed Eldridge to get a response to the lawsuit. However, according to Magistrate Davis the article was written without any personal input from him.

To make matters worse the Era reported that Magistrate Davis had also filed a lawsuit against Judge Murner. My opinion is that they were trying to indicate that Magistrate just likes to file lawsuits. What the Era failed to do was finish the story by explaining to its readers that Judge Murner was convicted of failing to release information under the Open Records law. That would have only taken one more sentence, but then that would have reflected that Magistrate Davis does not file lawsuits unless they are justified.

Yes, I can continue to save my money. Once again I remind people that the Era did not cover the hearing conducted by the Police Merit Board to determine if an Oldham County Police Officer would be fired.

I challenge you to get another side to any story that the Era prints. This is not the first time that the editor of the Era has written an article about Magistrate Scott Davis that did not have all of the facts in it. The editor has ties to the Murner administration. I would hope that those ties would not cloud her vision but everything indicates that for some reason the vision of the Era is clouded where Magistrate Scott Davis is concerned. Fortunately for Magistrate Davis the circulation of the Era is not formidable. Does anyone wonder why?

OLDHAM COUNTY FISCAL COURT TARGET ONCE AGAIN OF A NEW WEB SITE

2010-02-18T00:38:00.003-05:00

Once again the Oldham County Fiscal Court is the target of a web site. A new web site has been established for the purpose of bringing to the attention of the public that a "Squires' Club" now exists in Oldham County. During the current admisnistration some of the magistrates often refer to each other as "Squire". The most obvious person using the term is Judge Murner. I suppose that it may be easier to say Squire Jones than it is to say Magistrate Jones. Perhaps a sylable or two is saved.

If you would like to visit the site click here.

MAGISTRATE SCOTT DAVIS FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST STORMWATER DISTRICT CHAIRMAN KEVIN ELDRIDGE

2010-02-12T20:23:00.005-05:00

On February 12, 2010, Magistrate Scott Davis filed a lawsuit alleging that Oldham County Storm Water District Chairman Kevin Eldridge willfully withheld and refused to provide public information to Davis when formally requested by means of an "Open Records Request" pursuant to Kentucky law. Davis claims that Eldridge refused to provide all of the information related to bids and proposals for outsourcing the operations of the Storm Water District, which is now handled by Veolia Water.

Magistrate Scott Davis has been a foe of the methods used by the Murner administration and the Storm Water District since the formation of the District last year. He has stated that he believes that Oldham County needs to comply with the legal requirements of the environmental laws surrounding Storm Water regulations, but that he does not believe that it was necessary to form a separate District to comply with the laws nor was it necessary to charge the excessive fee that the county has mandated on homeowners, businesses, and others.

The Storm Water District has proven that Magistrate Scott Davis was correct. First, the District recently recommended that the fee be suspended for four months because it has collected excess money - imagine that. Why the District would temporarily suspend the fees but not reduce the fees is a question worth asking. My guess is that the District really wants to keep the fee at an excessive rate until the public furor over the rate subsides. Once that furor subsides there will be no suspensions of the collection of the fees and the fees will remain the same. The excessive fees will then likely be used for purposes that can disguised as Storm Water related, but are truly not.

Davis' claim that the District was not needed is also supported by Eldridge and the District because it has now recommended that the Fiscal Court consider combining the Storm Water District with the Sewer District. In my opinion, that would facilitate the channeling of Storm Water funds to the financially strapped Sewer District. Just remember everyone, follow the money trail. At the end of the money trail lies many answers to questions about control and influence in this county.

Lastly, let us not forget that Davis previously accused Judge-Executive Duane Murner of illegal secrecy concerning an open records violation and improper closed-door meeting of the Fiscal Court. Murner was convicted on both issues and Davis was proven to be correct.

To view the entire lawsuit/complaint click here

THE GISH DOG AND PONY SHOW

2010-02-10T17:24:00.005-05:00

I recently viewed a taped advertisement for Paula Gish. The ad featured Duane Murner, Ann Brown and Dennis Diebel. What a trio! The only thing missing was a member of the Bob Jones' family. After all, one would expect a member of the family that is providing the most financial support for Gish to also support her in the video.

Ann Brown is the person who made the decision that helped put the Oldham County School District into a lawsuit that could have dire consequences if the school board loses the lawsuit. Then there is Duane Murner, the man who increased fees and taxes in Oldham County more than any other County Judge that I can remember. We must not forget to give Dennis Diebel the credit that he deserves. He is the man who led the sewer district and resigned with the sewer district in the worst financial condition that it has ever been in. The books were so bad, according to Duane Murner, that an audit could not be done without the books being reconstructed by the county treasurer, Stan Clark. I don't believe that I would want that trio supporting me.

Two other observations were interesting. It is worth noting that Paula Gish did not speak. I do not expect to see her doing much talking anywhere as I expect someone else to be talking for her. Some things must be avoided. Frankly, I hope that there is a debate between her and the other candidate for County Judge, David Voegele. That would be worth the price of admission.

Also, I couldn't help but notice that Ann Brown appeared to be reading a script as her eyes continually glanced downward. What is it with these democrats? Do they all have to have a teleprompter or other device to assist them when they are talking?

David Voegele should hope that the Gish campaign puts this ad on television without any further polish.

THANKS TO THE OLDHAM COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT

2010-02-09T19:31:00.003-05:00

I have spoken with several people around the county today and each person has told me that the roads in their subdivision were clear despite the heavy snowfall that the county received. For this Brian Campbell and the employees of the road department are to be commended.

Yes, they may be doing what they are paid to do. However, I expect that they had to put in more hours than normal to get the roads cleared. Further, there are a lot of people who are paid to do a job, they just don't it well. Thanks to the road department.

DO YOU WANT TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE 2010 LOCAL ELECTIONS

2010-02-07T22:48:00.002-05:00

As most of the readers on this blog know I frequently distribute fliers around the county to inform people of a variety of issues that impact the county, including the actions of many politicians.

During the next few months I intend to distribute several fliers to the public to help keep the public informed about the various political races. Primarily I want to ensure that the public is aware of the voting records of the incumbents, from whom they derive their funding, and their positions on issues of interest to the public. Further, I intend to inform the public about the failures of their representatives to keep themselves properly informed about the matters that they vote on and their lack of contributing anything meaningful to the fiscal court.

If you would like to assist me in the distribution of these fliers, please send an email to me at the email address on this site and include in the email contact information. Thank you.

JUDGE MURNER THROWS BILL TUCKER UNDER THE TRAIN

2010-02-07T22:47:00.000-05:00

While Judge-Executive Duane Murner was throwing Oldham County Maintenance Director Bill Tucker under the train at the February 2, 2010 meeting of the Oldham County Fiscal, other Magistrates were busy defending their vote to approve the contract awarded to Classic Cleaning for cleaning of the Fiscal Court Building. At issue was the awarding of the contract and the subsequent use of jail inmates to do some of the cleaning work within the scope of the contract.

A little background is in order. Modern Maintenance was under contract to clean the Fiscal Court Building and the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) building that houses the District Court and the Oldham Circuit Court. Although the value of the contract for cleaning the AOC building is unknown at this time, the value of the contract to clean the Fiscal Court building was $25,000. As the contract for the cleaning the Fiscal Court building was about to expire, it was put up for bid again. The only two bidders on the contract were Modern Maintenance and Classic Cleaning. It must be noted that Classic Cleaning is owned by Wendi McGohon and Tina Schaaf, who are both employed in the office of County Judge-Executive Duane Murner.

In my opinion employees of the county should not be allowed to bid on county contracts. Nor should companies that are primarily owned by employees of the county be allowed to bid on county contracts.. County Attorney John Fendley said that no conflict of interest was involved at the time the contract was discussed. Further counsel should have been sought. I believe that a poll of the Oldham County residents would reflect that the vast majority of the people would agree that there appeared to be a conflict of interest.

To make matters worse, county jail inmates began assisting with the cleaning of the FC building immediately after Classic Cleaning was awarded the contract to clean the building. By Judge-Executive Murner’s own admission, inmates had never been used for cleaning the inside of either the Fiscal Court or AOC buildings and they are still not being used to assist Modern Maintenance with the cleaning of the AOC building.

The issue of using the inmates to assist Classic Cleaning in the Fiscal Court building was brought up for discussion at the last Fiscal Court meeting by Magistrate Scott Davis. From the onset of the discussion and the intense questioning by Magistrate Scott Davis, Murner immediately said that it was not his idea to allow the inmates to clean the building but rather the idea of Bill Tucker. He reiterated that Bill Tucker made the decision to start using the inmates and he made the decision to stop using the inmates. I wonder if Bill heard the train coming. In other words, if outside authorities come in to question anyone, Murner wanted his hands to be clean - pure and simple. Does he not remember that he is the County Judge-Executive, albeit in name only over the last three years, and as such he is responsible for what happens in the county.

Further, Murner claimed that the cleaning by the inmates was done under the supervision of Bill Tucker. He further stated that the inmates were being used to supplement the cleaning due to the additional salt that was being tracked into the building as a result of the inclement weather. When my wife saw the inmate cleaning Bill Tucker was not in sight and the inmate was not cleaning the floor, as he was cleaning the windows on the door. I can assure you that she is willing to testify to that in court. I wonder how other people’s stories would change if they were asked to raise their right hand and take an oath in a court of law. Murner’s story became more and more unravelled during the ongoing questioning by Magistrate Scott Davis. Toward the end of Davis’ questioning, Murner appeared shaken and unsure with his responses. There is an old saying, the truth is much easier to remember than the lie. Murner might want to take this advice to heart.

Magistrate Iva Davis, in a rare moment, decided to try and offer something to the discussion. She stated that the company having the contract would not have been able to clean the floors at the time that the inmate labor was being used, therefore she saw nothing wrong with the inmates helping. Once again let me reiterate the inmate was cleaning windows when my wife observed him. I feel certain that a poll of the other employees in the building would reflect that the inmate did more than clean the floors when an abnormal amount of dirt was being brought in by pedestrian traffic due to inclement weather.

Iva Davis went on to compare inmates doing other work in the county to the inmates doing work in the Fiscal Court building. She just doesn’t understand the issue, as is normal with her. The other inmates hopefully are not doing work that a contractor is being paid to do.

Even Magistrate Steve Church, who claims to be an affluent and knowledgeable businessman did not understand the issues. He also compared the cleaning of the Fiscal Court building to the inmates working at the recycling center or other places. Once again, hopefully the other inmates were not performing work that contractors were being paid to do.

Obviously feeling uncomfortable with the position he was in, Judge-Executive Murner once again tried to place blame on Bill Tucker. He stated that Tucker had not been happy with the performance of Modern Maintenance. Was he trying to say that was justification for allowing McGohon and Schaaf to have the contract? The problem with that reasoning is that Modern Maintenance is still cleaning the AOC building. If you were unhappy with a contractor, why would you not replace them entirely? I suppose that you could say that McGohon and Schaaf did not want to clean both buildings. Could that have been because they knew that they would not be able to use inmate help in the AOC building? More than one inquiring mind wants to know the answer to that question.

Speaking of security, my wife said that when she entered the Fiscal Court building on January 26, 2010 and saw the jail inmate cleaning, a closet door was open and there was nobody else present. Immediately she thought, “what was there to prevent this inmate from grabbing her and possibly taking her into the closet?” That thought is in no way a reflection on the inmate as my wife said that he was a very clean cut individual. It is just a natural reaction for a lot of women.

Magistrate Bob Leslie suggested that county employees not be allowed to bid on contracts in the future. Murner replied that to not allow county employees to bid on contracts would cost the county a lot of money. To say that he must be insinuating that county employees would do the job for less money. What evidence does he have to prove that? Are there other county employees that are doing work outside of the normal assigned duties and being paid for it? Are there other county employees that have contracts with the county? His statement was nothing more than a feeble attempt to justify his uncomfortable position. It was clear that Murner did not have adequate answers or responses for Magistrate Davis’ questions.

Magistrate Rick Rash offered his thought on the issue and in doing so demonstrated that he did not understand the issue either, by which nobody was really surprised. He stated that he advised the administration to stop using the inmates and that since they had stopped, there was no harm and therefore, no foul. As is the norm for Rash his reasoning is on a different plane than that of most other people.

Let me sum this up for you. The issue here is not the use of inmate labor to save money. The issue is the proper bidding of contracts. The inmate help was not offered to the other company that bid on the contract, as this was clear from Magistrate Scott Davis’ questioning of Murner. Had the use of inmates been offered to the other company, perhaps their bid would have been as low as or lower than the bid of Classic Cleaning. The foul is that both bidders were not on the same field. The Judge can argue all day long that there was no wrongdoing in the bid process, but everything appears to point to the fact that additional help was given to Classic Cleaning in a secretive manner after the awarding of the bid. At what point Classic Cleaning learned that it would receive additional help is unclear.

It all stinks and I am not the only person that smells the aroma.

SEWER DISTRICT WOES CONTINUE

2010-02-05T11:17:00.002-05:00

For the past couple of years the Oldham County Sewer District has often been at the front of the news. Their lack of capacity, inability to operate efficiently, and their financial status issues have been the center of discussions. Meanwhile Judge Murner has continued to promise that an audit of the district was right around the corner. At the last fiscal court meeting once again the subject of their finances was brought up by Magistrate Scott Davis.

State law requires that all districts receiving more than $750,000 per year have an annual audit. Magistrate Scott Davis has been inquiring of Judge Murner about the audit for several months. Murner has always said that the audit will be forthcoming very shortly. However, as of yet, no audit has been performed, and according to Murner the audit may not be done in the near future.

Murner said that the books of the sewer district are in such bad condition that it was necessary for Stan Clark, the county treasurer, to reconstruct the books as far back as 1998. Without question this reflects that the oversight of the sewer district was nil. There is a good likelihood that there were instances of misfeasance, malfeasance and nonfeasance of office by people in charge of the district over the years. However, nobody has chosen to try to bring those people to justice. They have chosen to sweep the dirt under the carpet.If the books have bben improperly maintained since 1998, it possible that an audit has not been conducted since then. What would you think if that were the case?

Knowing that the books of the sewer district were in horrible condition, Murner still asked the fiscal court to assume responsibility of several million dollars of debt. What is worse is that the majority of the members of fiscal court blindly followed his suggestion. I asked the fiscal court to at least wait until an audit was completed before accepting the responsibility of the debt but they refused to do so. The fact is that most of the members are totally irresponsible or stupid and neither bodes well for the citizens of Oldham County.

Magistrate Davis also asked that Murner explain why Magistrate David Voegele was denied access to the meeting of the Oldham LaGrange Development Authority (OLDA) meeting that was being conducted to discuss the contract proposal by Talmadge Hocker for the Oldham Reserve even though Murner was allowed to attend and he is not a member of OLDA. Murner stated he had nothing to do with the decision to keep Voegele out of the meeting and that he was asked to join the meeting because he had worked closely with OLDA during the negotiations. Murner may have worked closely with OLDA but he certainly has not shared his information with the fiscal court even though the court/county is paying for all of the legal bills for the negotiations. Considering that Murner prefers to operate in secrecy it should come as no surprise that he would not keep members of the court informed.

If my memory serves me correctly, I believe that Murner and other members of the Kinser court constantly complained about Mary Ellen Kinser keeping information from them. I challenge any member of that court to prove to me that she was more secretive than Judge Duane Murner. The present fiscal court needs major changes. All the public can hope for is that some of the people challenging incumbents are successful and that they are not willing to endure the secrecy that the present court has endured.

ARE CRIMINAL CHARGES IN OLDHAM COUNTY'S FUTURE

2010-02-01T23:20:00.001-05:00

Recently, the Oldham County Fiscal Court awarded a contract to clean the Oldham County Fiscal Court Building to a company called Classic Cleaning. At the time I thought that it was a conflict of interest as Classic Cleaning is owned by Wendi McGohon and Tina Schaaf, both of whom are employed in the office of Oldham County Judge-Executive Duane Murner. Further, there was another company that sought the contract through a bid.

Approximately one month ago I received an anonymous letter advising me that Oldham County Jail inmates were cleaning the Fiscal Court Building and that McGohon and Schaaf were not actually performing the work. On January 26, 2010 my wife personally witnessed an inmate cleaning the Fiscal Building. Additionally, I have been informed by at least three other people that inmates were being used to clean the building.

Upon receiving the anonymous letter, the first question that I asked myself was “Did the bid request for proposals make the inmate help available to the other bidder involved in the process?” I doubt that it was, and have heard that it was not. When was the decision made to allow the contractors to use inmates to clean the building? Frankly, this smells like “bid-rigging”.

I intend to do more investigating of this matter. I believe that there is enough information and witnesses available at this point to take the matter to authorities outside the county. I have been told that the county has stopped allowing the inmates to clean the Fiscal Court Building due to complaints, including those made by individuals working in the Fiscal Court Building. However, the toothpaste is already out of the tube and if you have tried to put toothpaste back in a tube, you know that it is almost impossible. The fact is that any other bidder on the contract should have a basis to file suit against the county unless something is done to make the losing bidder(s) “whole”.

It is a shame that a county which has enjoyed the reputation that Oldham County enjoyed just a few years ago now seems be under a cloud all the time. If this trend continues Oldham residents will be looking for “vanity” license plates that don’t reflect their home county.

As I say, stay tuned. Certainly more will follow on this issue.

JD SPARKS SEEKS 5TH DISTRICT MAGISTRATE POSITION

2010-01-27T17:45:00.001-05:00

Oldham County Conservative J.D. Sparks Runs for Oldham County 5th District Magistrate

Pewee Valley, KY (January 27, 2010) – Local resident J.D. Sparks filed registration papers to seek the Republican nomination for Magistrate for the fifth district in Oldham County, Kentucky. Long time resident of Oldham County, Sparks plans to be the “true conservative” on the ballot and feels that fiscal responsibility, smart growth and good schools are keys to a successful future for Oldham County. Sparks understands the balance necessary to grow Oldham County responsibly while maintaining the traditional, welcoming atmosphere that has enhanced its excellent reputation.

Politically, Sparks was nominated as an Alternate Delegate to the 2008 GOP National Convention. He has previously served as Precinct Captain, the Oldham County representative for the Fourth District Republican Convention Resolutions Committee and Legislative District Chair for the Jefferson County Republican Party. Sparks has been recognized multiple times by the Republican National Committee and served as the National Voter Registration officer for the Republicans Abroad while living in Japan.

In this election he plans to run as a long time conservative Republican and community supporter. He is a graduate of local leadership programs such as Leadership Oldham County, Oldham County Police Citizen’s Academy, LaGrange Police Citizen’s Academy and is currently participating in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Citizen’s Academy in Jefferson County.

Sparks is a United States Marine Veteran and currently serves as a nationally recognized newsletter editor for the Marine Corps League Detachment 729 in Kentucky. Among his civic involvement, he works with the United Way in reviewing programs and funding for Oldham County and surrounding areas, has worked on committees for the Red Cross, KIDS Center for Cerebral Palsy and serves as the regional contact for the National Rifle Association’s legislative efforts.

Sparks currently serves as an executive vice president in the finance industry, where he assists publicly traded firms with SEC filings and Public Relations. His company works to bring new business opportunities to the region and has been recognized in recent years as a “Best Small Business” in the Incredible Awards and as a “High Impact Company” by Louisville Chamber of Commerce (GLI). He has two of the largest online networking groups in the area (Greater Louisville Networking and Semper Fi Network on linkedin.com) and works to support the growth of business in the area.

Sparks has the support of political leaders in the area as well as national figures. War hero Scott O’Grady, who was shot down in Bosnia and featured on the cover of Time magazine, has endorsed Sparks.

Sparks is a graduate of Loyola University Chicago and Jefferson Community College. He resides in Pewee Valley with his wife Yuko and two sons, where he is active in their Cub Scouts and Soccer teams.

MY APOLOGY TO MAGISTRATE BOB LESLIE

2010-01-27T17:33:00.003-05:00

In my article of January 26, 2010 I discussed the firing of Oldham County Code Enforcement Office Mitch Nobles. During that discussion I stated that six of the magistrates voted to fire Mich Nobles and that two abstained. By saying that I inferred that Magistrate Bob leslie also voted to fire Nobles. The fact is Bob Leslie was not present during the executive session during which that decision was made.

Please allow me to take this opportunity to set the record straight and offer my apology to Magistrate Bob Leslie.

NOW DO YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM NOT RUNNING FOR OFFICE IN 2010

2010-01-26T20:52:00.000-05:00

Over the past three years I have spent a lot of time attending various public meetings conducted by different local government agencies. I have also played a large role in opposing many local government proposals. Additionally, I have started this web site in order to expose the illegal and ill conceived actions of local government.

Because of my efforts many people claimed that I was trying to increase my public exposure in order to seek public office in 2010. Most of the people making those accusations were people who would not do anything for the public unless it benefited them.

Well, the filing deadline for 2010 has come and gone and I did not file for any office. I hope that my naysayers will start trying to contribute to the community instead of criticizing my motives. I intend to continue to uncover public corruption and to expose the actions of elected officials to the public. I will also expose illegal activities of non elected public officials. The time has come for the people of Oldham County to regain control of the local government and to make the government work for them.

WANTED: ATTORNEY WILLING TO SWIM UPSTREAM

2010-01-25T17:38:00.003-05:00

Duane Murner has been in office just slightly over three years and there has been no shortage of complaints filed against him that was related to personnel actions. And, his won/loss record on the proceedings does not look favorable. Will the county need another lawyer who is dedicated to defending Murner? Perhaps there should be a sign on the courthouse door that reads, “Wanted: Full-Time Attorney Willing to Swim Upstream.” It might also be wise to hire another person for human resources to assist Judge Murner in his personnel decisions.

First, there is the issue of the alleged refusal, of the county, to hire Bruce Gentry for a county police officer position because he has a military obligation. From reading the lawsuit and other information that I have obtained I doubt that the county has a prayer of winning that lawsuit. However, the final disposition of that lawsuit is not likely to come about until Murner is out of office.

The second instance involved the county police department’s attempt to fire Officer Tom Douglas. Fortunately for Douglas the Police Merit Board overturned that decision. That decision surely saved the county from itself as a lawsuit was almost certain. However, the county was still required to repay Douglas for time lost and that amounted to several thousand dollars.

The latest issue is the firing of Mitch Nobles, the county Code Enforcement Officer. Nobles filed a lawsuit against the county and in my opinion will win that lawsuit. In this instance most members of the Fiscal Court can share the blame with Judge Murner as six of them voted to fire Nobles (Magistrates Scott Davis and David Voegele abstained from voting because they claim that they did not have sufficient information upon which to base a fair decision).

Again I ask, when will the magistrates grow some backbone and quit following Murner like blind sheep? There is NO excuse for their actions. Taking a person’s employment from him is not something that should be taken lightly but that seems to be what happened in this instance. The fact is, the public has not held the magistrates accountable for their actions. It is time that they are held responsible.

Then there are the two lawsuits that Magistrate Scott Davis filed against Judge Murner – one for having a secret meeting and the other for the Judge’s failure to release public information. Murner lost both of those lawsuits. I suspect that there are more to come.

After all of these legal problems I would hope that people are very careful when they characterize the Kinser administration as giving outsiders a bad impression of Oldham County. The Murner administration smacks of being very cavalier regarding employee rights and the public’s right to know. This administration reminds me of a “banana republic dictatorship.” The next year cannot go too fast for the public. The sooner that Murner is out of office the better off the public will be. The question then becomes, can the next judge clean up the mess that will obviously be left?

MORE PEOPLE HAVE FILED TO ENTER POLITICAL RACES

2010-01-23T00:21:00.006-05:00

I understand that Mike Logsdon, a Republican, has entered the race for the eighth district magisterial seat. He will be facing incumbent Bob Diebel. Logsdon, who is a local realtor should be a formidable opponent for Diebel. However, his ties to developer Bob Jones may cause some people to be leery of him. Only time will tell if he tries to distance himself from Bob Jones or if he is a supporter of Jones.

Apparently Bob Dye has made it official - he will challenge Rick Rash for the Republican nomination for the seventh district magisterial seat. As I previously said, Rash only defeated Dye by sixteen votes in 2006. At that time Dye carried the Glen Oaks area but Rash carried the Briar Hill and the Spring Hill neighborhoods. However, a lot has happened since the last election. The most notable thing is the lawsuit filed by the people in Spring Hill and Briar Hill over the proposed Brentwood subdivision.

My sources tell me that many people in Briar Hill and Spring Hill are very unhappy with Rick Rash as he has supported development, appointments of pro-development members to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has received political contributions from developers. Rash has also voted YES on every tax and fee increase this term and has been a puppet for Judge-Executive Duane Murner to use as needed in accomplishing his missions.

If my calculations are correcet he has easily lost enough votes in those subdivisions to allow Dye to win the nomination. Rash has been campaigning hard as he knows that he is in trouble. However, it is difficult to cover up your record and to convince people that you will be any different in the future than you have been for the past sixteen years.

I have also heard that there may be an opponent for Julie Barr. Thus, I am anxiously awaiting the filing deadline for people to file for different races. Again, stay tuned!