Rybak surfaces tonight at a fundraiser for John Choi at the Minneapolis Club at 5 p.m.

Mayor Rybak will be a featured guest tonight at a fundraiser for John Choi, the
St. Paul city attorney who wants to become Ramsey County Attorney.  The event
will take place at the Minneapolis Club, 729 Second Ave. S. in downtown
Minneapolis., starting at 5:00 p.m. A number of the lesser known candidates for
mayor of Minneapolis will be protesting the event.

While the incumbent mayor has claimed to be willing to debate his opponents in
this year's mayoral campaign, he has in fact focused on running for state
office next year. The Choi fundraiser is an example.

John Choi is not universally beloved in the Twin Cities because he has been the
legal front man for a number of questionable policies and practices undertaken
by the authorities in St. Paul.  His role in prosecuting the RNC protesters
last year is quite well known.  Choi's office has also been accused of
shredding legal documents in a racketeering case brought by three St. Paul
landlords against the city of St. Paul.

St. Paul city officials closed down a bar on Rice Street, Diva's bar, because
neighbors did not like the clientele that the bar on several occasions had
attracted.  The former owner of this bar will be at the protest event to tell
her story.  For those who cannot wait, it's posted on the web at
http://www.landlordpolitics.com/divas.html.

This type of event is where money intersects with political candidates.  Both
Twin City mayors will be there at the Minneapolis Club along with prominent
donors.  Those who are affected by bad city policy can stand outside expressing
their views. Any interested person is invited to participate.

It seems to me the opponents would be better served by putting on their
tennis shoes and knocking on some doors, rather than protesting at a
fundraiser. You'll get more votes by talking positively about what you want
to accomplish than by protesting at an event where you will not be well
received. Or is it the publicity you want, rather than actually interacting
positively with voters?

Linda higgins
Old highland

-----Original Message-----
From: <email obscured> <email obscured>]
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 12:06 PM
To: <email obscured>
Subject: [Mpls] Rybak surfaces tonight at a fundraiser for John Choi at the
Minneapolis Club at 5 p.m.

Mayor Rybak will be a featured guest tonight at a fundraiser for John Choi,
the St. Paul city attorney who wants to become Ramsey County Attorney.  The
event will take place at the Minneapolis Club, 729 Second Ave. S. in
downtown Minneapolis., starting at 5:00 p.m. A number of the lesser known
candidates for mayor of Minneapolis will be protesting the event.

While the incumbent mayor has claimed to be willing to debate his opponents
in this year's mayoral campaign, he has in fact focused on running for state
office next year. The Choi fundraiser is an example.

John Choi is not universally beloved in the Twin Cities because he has been
the legal front man for a number of questionable policies and practices
undertaken by the authorities in St. Paul.  His role in prosecuting the RNC
protesters last year is quite well known.  Choi's office has also been
accused of shredding legal documents in a racketeering case brought by three
St. Paul landlords against the city of St. Paul.

St. Paul city officials closed down a bar on Rice Street, Diva's bar,
because neighbors did not like the clientele that the bar on several
occasions had attracted.  The former owner of this bar will be at the
protest event to tell her story.  For those who cannot wait, it's posted on
the web at http://www.landlordpolitics.com/divas.html.

This type of event is where money intersects with political candidates.
Both Twin City mayors will be there at the Minneapolis Club along with
prominent donors.  Those who are affected by bad city policy can stand
outside expressing their views. Any interested person is invited to
participate.
William McGaughey
Harrison, Minneapolis
Info about Bill McGaughey: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/williammcgaughey

View all messages on this topic at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7rAs7qiDuZ4A5Xuj2LVb4W
-----------------------------------------
  To post, e-mail: <email obscured>
  Use "Reply-to-All" via e-mail to post publicly.
  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on"
  in subject, then send to: <email obscured>

  More information about Minneapolis Issues Forum:
  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/mpls

  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
-----------------------------------------
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net

 1. Be civil! Please read the rules at http://e-democracy.org/rules.
   If you think a member is in violation, contact the forum manager at
   <email obscured> before continuing it on the list.

2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.423 / Virus Database: 270.14.33/2461 - Release Date: 10/26/09
20:22:00

Mayor Rybak has been spotted at a mayoral campaign event!  It happened last
evening at a candidate forum sponsored by the Lyndale Neighborhood Association.
I even have a photograph!

I don't know why the mayor decided to participate at this late date.  Because
of pressure exerted by the "minor candidates"?  Because he thought it was the
right thing to do?  The mayor did fire a parting insult at Al Flowers as he
left the meeting, and Flowers returned the fire with a remark ("coward") of his
own. I was the last speaker and did not have a chance to exchange views with
the mayor. But now Mayor Rybak can legitimately claim to have participated in a
mayoral forum other than the one on MPR next week.

An unexpected piece of good news for me was found in Sunday's editorial which
endorsed Rybak’s re-election. It allowed that several of the other candidates
had some good ideas.  The editorial included this statement:  "Landlord Bill
McGaughey is right to question whether targeting 'problem properties' rather
than criminal conduct itself is either a just or effective crime-fighting
strategy."   Since the "problem-property" concept is at the core of the city's
crime-fighting policy, this is quite a statement.

I don't know if it was that comment in the paper which produced a backlash from
snipers on this list or some other motivation, but there appeared a series of
attacks on me to which I will now try to respond.  I will try to remain civil
while doing it.  Tim Bonham's accusation that the candidates debates sponsored
by Metro Property Rights Action Committee were not legitimate debates has
already received a response.  Now for the others:

Dean Carlson wrote yesterday: "William's 'let the rental owners alone' stance
demonstrates quite clearly why most people ignore the so called 'fringe mayoral
candidates.' For the most part these candidates have one issue they have
thought deeply about and have some different solutions. Unfortunately there is
very little thinking about all the other stuff that happens in the City and
what a Mayor deals with on a day-to-day basis and these candidates fall back on
trite and simple (and sometimes weird) answers to complex problems. That's why
most people will be voting for R.T. in two weeks, you may have issue with some
of his stances and previous performance, but at least he has a universal,
coherent strategy for running the City."  He then characterizes me as being
among "a bunch of other candidates who would give me pause to even watch my
dog."

I don't know what watching the dog has to do with anything, but I will say it
is unfair to assume that I or any of the other non-Rybak candidates are
single-issue people with no thoughts on other subjects.  I have published seven
books on various subjects and ran for Congress last year not mentioning
rental-property issues.  Carlson's characterization that we have done little
thinking on other aspects of the mayor's job, without any supporting evidence,
may reinforce his own stereotype more than reflect the actual situation.

Later in the day Jim Graham weighed in with a message too long to quote
substantially.  He suggested that state law precludes repealing the Minneapolis
ordinance - 244.2020, 'conduct on licensed premise'".  I doubt that.  Yes, I am
aware of the state ordinance and I favor repeal of that as well.  The threats
of $3,000 fines and a year's jail time may be meant to rattle my cage, but the
cage is more rattled by other events in the campaign for mayor.

Graham suggests that Metro Property Rights Action Committee is "continuing to
defend any and all bad behavior of landlords".  No, that is not our position.
We have never taken that position.  I will say, however, that MPRAC is not an
organization that exists to police the business of its members.  We are focused
instead on our common relationship to city government.

Graham would have more influence with our group, and more say in the type of
organization that we are, if he joined the group and contributed to its
activities.  He has never done that.  We have supported him in his 1997
political campaign, but he has never supported us.  I would say that, if Graham
thinks we should have a "good landlord" group (like the one that existed in St.
Paul), he should start his own.  Good luck, Jim!  Do the organizing work.  Then
you can talk.

Now we came to Caty Royce's typically pungent statements, made later in the
day, about John Choi and shredding documents.  Yes, this is alleged in a
lawsuit now in federal court.  The evidence will be presented and evaluated in
court.  Then, reversing course, Royce writes:  "Someone should have shredded
the documents since they weren't worth the paper they were printed on."
Destroying evidence in a trial, despite a court order to the contrary, seems a
light matter to her.  This racketeering case brought against the city of St.
Paul she calls "some punk claim against the city, that wasn't going and indeed
hasn't gone anywhere in court..."  Such clairvoyance!

In response to the posting about about a protest at the fundraiser for John
Choi, Linda Higgins writes:  "It seems to me the opponents would be better
served by putting on their tennis shoes and knocking on some doors, rather than
protesting at a fundraiser."  We are, she thinks, publicity seekers rather than
candidates with our own serious views on city policy.

This gets back to the fallacious thinking that Dean Carlson exhibited in his
posting.  Because we candidates do one thing that is publicized does not mean
that we do not do other things as well.  I have done plenty of door knocking in
my campaign.  I have tried to discuss serious issues.  If interested, you can
read position papers on several subjects at http://www.newdignityparty.org.
Having said that, however, I also think it would be nice if some of the lesser
known candidates got publicity, such as that given us by Channel 9 news last
Wednesday, instead of news reports that say the election is effectively over.
We do need to communicate with voters on a scale that will affect city
elections.

Finally, we come to Jeff Skrenes' reaction to the fact that the former owner of
Diva's bar was expected at the Choi protest event.  He writes:  "I happened to
be living near Rice St. in St. Paul when Diva's was shut down.  Like a lot of
actions taken against slummy rental properties, (in)convenience stores, and
problem dive bars, that was THE BEST thing to happen to that block in a LONG
TIME."

That is only your opinion, Mr. Skrenes.  You have many negative views of people
that are posted on this forum.  The closing of Diva's bar has to do with the
fact that a fatal shooting took place in the bar, despite screening procedures,
and a city council member used this as a pretext to go after the bar owner.
The other aspect is that a church in the neighborhood wanted that property to
build a church-owned facility and it did not want to pay much.  You can read
about this at http://www.landlordpolitics.com/divas.html.

A question:  How long have you lived in Hawthorne, Mr. Skrenes, Hawthorne Hawk?

Mr. McGaughey:

In terms of the effects of actions taken against Diva's in St. Paul, you are
correct.  That IS only my opinion.  However, I felt it was a pertinent one to
give since I had direct experience as a local resident at that time.

Regarding my "negative comments:"  I was only formally told by a site
administrator once that I had violated a rule, and that was for neglecting to
post my full name and neighborhood at the end of a comment.  I made one
sarcastic remark about putting a campaign platform to song, which specifically
referred to you, and had someone (although not a site administrator) tell me
they felt it may have crossed a line.  I do agree with some other folks, by the
way, that I wouldn't mind hearing Kolstad sing about his political views, even
the ones I don't agree with.

In terms of specific people who have been the focus of my "negative comments,"
there is far more negativity here directed at Rybak (and hey, although I'm a
supporter I'll admit that I think some of it is even warranted).

It is my belief that neither you, Mr. Flowers, nor any other mayoral candidate
besides Rybak has shown the capability to run this city.  I will state that
belief and others when I feel compelled to do so.  Furthermore, I believe that
the landlordpolitics.com site is little more than an apologist for those who
will not or cannot take responsibility for what happens on their own property.
(By the way, I'm sure there are plenty of people who disagree with the blogging
that John Hoff and I do, and I do not take it personally when such views are
stated here or elsewhere.)

While crime can happen anywhere and property owners must be served more than
penalized by the city, there comes a point where the property owner bears
responsibility.  Successful landlords and business owners CAN and DO set the
tone for what happens on and around their property, and I fully support holding
the ones that don't accountable--especially once a pattern of neglect is
clearly demonstrated.

We have fundamental disagreements and I hope we can emphatically yet civilly
state them here.

Finally, you ask how long I have been living in Hawthorne.  For the sake of
demonstrating that I did not begin calling MYSELF the "Hawthorne Hawkman," here
is the johnnynorthside.com post where that nickname was born (by an anonymous
commenter):
http://adventuresofjohnnynorthside.blogspot.com/2009/04/warning-city-inspectors-hawthorne.html

Perhaps I am reading your question from too defensive of a standpoint, but I
detect an accusatory tone and therefore will answer this way:  I've been living
in Hawthorne long enough to publicly state my opinions about and passion for my
community with a certain degree of confidence that such beliefs are grounded in
the experience of many of my fellow neighbors.

Jeff Skrenes
Hawthorne