Monday, December 5th, 2016

Wigderson and his critics

0

Alderman Roger Patton wrote a letter to the editor that appeared Saturday in the Waukesha Freeman that complained about my column that appeared Thursday.

Wigderson column wrong about aldermanic race

To the editor: Mr. Wigderson, in Thursday’s column, you had so much wrong about the 11th District aldermanic race that it reflects negatively not only on your veracity, but on my opponent, whom you are trying to help with your endorsement based on untruths. He is the one involved in the investigation into the possible voter fraud in the primary (of which he was absolutely innocent). So why list it? I am not a member of the Waukesha Downtown Business Association, but their financial report is passed out monthly. What has that got to do with your support for my opponent instead of me? Whose website has been “threatened?” Isn’t that a police matter? After saying that all the problems of downtown cannot be laid at my feet, you proceed to list three incidents which have nothing to do with me, but in doing so, you seem to imply my involvement or guilt, somehow.

The Business Improvement District may or may not dissolve. We won’t know until April 6. Your newspaper, to its credit, did not sign on with those trying to dissolve the BID. Meghan’s car tires were never slashed, but her car was keyed.

And I didn’t do it. I always tried to help her.

Mr. Wigderson, you have been sniping at our mayor, at some of the other aldermen, and now you are attacking me. I think you want to run our beautiful city.

If so, why not run for alderman yourself ? But slander by implication should never be the basis for your campaign. The voters are too smart.

Roger Patton

11th district alderman

According to Patton I had so much wrong in my column, “…it reflects negatively not only on your veracity, but on my opponent, whom you are trying to help with your endorsement based on untruths.”

Of course, Patton cannot list the errors except for one. After the location of Former BID Executive Director Meghan Sprager’s car was located – by Patton, in his version of events – the car was keyed; the tires were not slashed. I’m sure that made Sprager feel a whole lot better about Patton’s involvement the damage to her car that it was keyed instead of the tires slashed.

There were no other errors, and Patton knows it.

In his letter, Patton claims that he tried to help Sprager. Was that before or after he and his fellow BID Board members resigned in  an attempt to shut down the organization so Sprager’s claims of harassment could not be investigated? When did he stand up to defend her reputation after her allegations were made and faced the inevitable backlash downtown? When did he ever raise the conduct of then-BID President Norm Bruce’s behavior? Did Patton at least offer to help fix the damage to her car, given his own self-professed role in the alleged vandalism?

Patton wonders why I listed the problems occurring downtown since they could not be of any concern to him or his constituents – who happen to reside downtown.

Patton accuses me of “slander by implication.” If he means libel, he is more than welcome to his day in court – if he can find a lawyer willing to take his case. There is nothing slanderous or libelous in what I wrote, and it’s not by implication. It’s an indictment of his misconduct and his incompetence.

As for Patton’s claim that I want to run the city, that it is not my role. But what a pathetic defensive statement to make. Does he ask that of any of his constituents who question his actions? There are 60,000 people in this city who have a say in how this city is run. Does Patton resent that any of them may disagree or question his conduct in office?

I’m a political writer, an observer of the politics of our city. Run the city? No, but I will write what I see, and I see a man unfit to hold public office,

Be Sociable, Share!

Print this entry

Comments are closed.