The Brainerd City Council made no movement in a resident’s request for a hearing to oust council member Gary Scheeler.
Brainerd resident Guy Green called for Scheeler to be removed from his seat at the Brainerd City Council meeting earlier this month.
Green suggested the Ward 3 council member used his position to get Green removed from his radio broadcast, “The Speakeasy,” a political talk show on 3WI Radio.
Green said Scheeler canceled advertisements for Scheeler’s business on the station because of views Green expressed on his talk show. Further, Green said Scheeler put pressure on 3WI Radio management against the program.
Scheeler’s lawyer, Ed Shaw, however, said Scheeler never demanded the program be taken off the air. Instead, he stopped the 90-second advertisements for his business a couple of weeks ago because he didn’t want to continue advertising on a station that attacked him by calling him names and criticizing his business, Shaw said.
Shaw sent a written response before Tuesday’s meeting.
“Mr. Green is upset that Alderman Scheeler suspended his advertising. ... Mr. Green’s claim that Alderman Scheeler does not have a right to terminate his advertising on a radio program or talk to others in the community who he knows about the personal attacks occurring on Mr. Green’s show is without merit or credibility. Mr. Green is apparently upset that Mr. Scheeler won a recent election against a candidate backed by Mr. Green and is upset that Mr. Scheeler has not voted the way that Mr. Green would have wanted him to on recent issues before the city. Political disagreement is not a basis for removal of an elected official or the council having a public hearing of any kind.”
At Tuesday’s meeting, City Attorney Tom Fitzpatrick said the council is not required to hold a hearing, but it can, should the members choose to.
“You should be aware that even if the council chooses not to go forward with this serious process, there are other remedies,” he said.
Either person could bring civil or criminal action against the other.
If the council were to choose to pursue charges, a 10-day notice would be required before a hearing takes place, and a two-thirds majority vote would be needed to remove any council member.
The council had very little discussion on the topic.
Since it was not a public hearing, the audience could not speak in the council’s dialogue.
After no motion was made to move forward, Green, who sat in the front row, stared silently forward in Scheeler’s direction.
Green stood up during the open forum part of the council meeting, but once he started reading his statement, was told by council president Bonnie Cumberland to sit down since it was in reference to his complaint against Scheeler. Open forum discussion cannot be about items that already appeared on the agenda.
Council member Mary Koep made a motion to overturn Cumberland’s decision, which died after a lack of a second.
Green shook his head and left council chambers.
Scheeler would only say after the meeting that he is “taking the high road.”
JESSICA LARSEN may be reached at jessica.larsen@brainerddispatch.com or 855-5859. Follow me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/brainerdnews.
Comments (21)
Add commentMr. Green
Green needs to move on and perhaps he can rant in another city someplace else. I think most people are tired of him no matter which side of the fence you are on.
As well, people are tired of
As well, people are tired of Scheeler. Perhaps the council could send him to that anger management course supposedly offered at the college.
I think some council members are wetting their pants over this. Not knowing what to do but, Bonnie took charge and straightened that noisy intruder out.
Naturally, the lawyer involved would mention lawsuits are available to each person. Yea, that will help, just give money to lawyers. Maybe a time-out chair for Scheeler and one for Guy.
sweeping under the rug
To put this to an end, sweeping it under the rug will only add to what has already been swept under the rug. Letting this drag on or just ignoring it, wishing it would go away will only lead to spending more time and taxpayer resources in the long run. Let the "boys" put on the gloves and get it over so that council can move on with other issues or projects that will benefit the "citizens" of the City of Brainerd.
city council hearing
As usual, all but one City Council member showed total disregard of a citizens' rights. The Council member, who receives funds from Brainerd taxpayers, needs to take responsibility for his actions, but not at our expense.
His lawyer should not be able to get his letters read at council meetings when other people are not able to speak up during the open forum. City officials need to be accountable, and sad to say, that is not characteristic of their current and past actions.
held accountable for what?
Was Mr. Scheeler OBLIGATED to support a radio show that openly calls him names with private business advertising dollars? Of COURSE NOT.
Points of logic: if Mr. Scheeler were in charge of public funds and he denied Green's access to them, that would be illegal and Green would have grounds for complaint. However, Green is essentially trying to remove Scheeler from the city council because Scheeler removed advertising dollars SPENT ON BEHALF OF HIS PRIVATE BUSINESS. Mr. Scheeler is not obligated to spend his private business dollars, or for that matter his paycheck for other work -- including his work on the city council -- on behalf of Green's radio show.
This is beyond ridiculous.
Did Mr. Scheeler prevent Green from soliciting advertising funds elsewhere? Can't Mr. Green find other advertisers? Why is he not charging into board meetings at 3wi for his job? And if this was so egregious, why did 3wi not show up to demand the city underwrite their radio programming?
Did Mr. Scheeler use his position on the city council to deny broadcasting rights? No.
Mr. Scheeler could withdraw advertising funds for any number of reasons. Maybe he decided not to invest in radio. Maybe his business could no longer afford it. Maybe he didn't want his business' name associated with that particular show. Maybe he didn't want to support the guy who was racking him over the coals. These are legal and justifiable reasons for Mr. Scheeler's actions.
Mr. Green, on the other hand, seems like he wants the city either to force Mr. Scheeler's PRIVATE business to underwrite his show, penalize him by attempting to remove him from office, or potentially drag him into a costly court case that was none of his making. I'm confused how Mr. Green, who claims to be from the party of "less government intrusion" and "personal freedom" can justify these actions.
Did Mr. Green also insist, when he was in elementary school, that students who perhaps shared lunch money with him on a day he was hungry then be required to pay his lunch for the school year?
The conspiracy theory spinning hijinks of Mr. Green and his companions detracts from much more serious business before the city. At what point will he accept the last election, and if the current council bothers him so much, why isn't he out campaigning to try to join them in the next term?
Radio shows survive on their advertising dollars. It is not a novel concept that the show's personalities lost advertising because they had a difference of opinion on editorial content. No public money was designated or used in this affair. This difference of opinion is not an impeachable offense. Mr. Green's actions are not "the truth begging to come out." They are a waste of taxpayer time.
Jeb 37
What citizen right was disregarded?
The right to require private businesses support any editorial endeavor?
I'm hoping the Girl Scouts don't remember I lost my head ordering cookies last year. I bought 20 boxes from 3 scouts. This year, I can't afford to buy more than 10. I'm hoping my inability to buy as many girl scout cookies this year won't cost me my job or cause need for public hearings.
This has to be
This is some sort of joke, right?
Confused
I'm confused here, so Mr Scheeler is being held accountable for withdrawing advertising dollars from a business that called him and/or his business names or did not portray him or his business in a positive manner. Last I knew a good business practice was to spend your advertising dollars to achieve the best results. I don't think spending to support an adversarial person or business would be in ones best interest. Also don't see how this is the City Councils business, Put on your big boy pants and move on.
we were all created... is lost in a fallacy
Dear "we were all created..." Mr. Scheeler was NEVER a sponsor on the Speakeasy. His "advertising dollars" never benefited Mr. Greens Speakeasy radio show... ever. The Speakeasy was self funded with it's own ads, the Priors nor the sales staff at wwwi EVER sold any ads for the Speakeasy. Some advertisers that wanted to be specifically on the Speakeasy were deflected by owners and sales staff to advertise on wwwi during the rest of the broadcast day, that is now coming to light since the show was forced off the air by coercion and bullying by an elected city official. THAT city official (Mr. Scheeler) had been outed by the Speakeasy for lies and deceit. So, if one is to base a "theory" such as you have on false information, the rest of your case is nullified. And when it comes to court cases, Mr. Scheeler goes running there plenty on his own, we will see how that works out when torpedo #2 strikes the hull of his ship:) Come back if and when you have a clue about what has gone on instead of prancing in here with about 2% of the facts and go off like Scheeler on a sales pitch.
photo
The problem ( I think) is not that he pulled his ad but, that he contacted other advertisers to try to convince them to pull their ads. This was my impression from the articles and information offered thus far.
You may have received your information from Mr. Shaw who is Scheeler's lawyer. You should know there usually are two sides to every story. The merchants contacted would have to be willing to come forward and may be concerned Scheeler
would intimidate them. This is all my opinion after I've read all the available information.
I don't know either man and I wasn't there nor did I hear the radio show so, this is worth what you are paying for it.
we were all created....
we were all created... How can you possibly go on for so long without knowing the simple facts of this story? In the time it took you to write your EIGHT paragraph diatribe, you could have learned enough to advise Fitzpatrick on the constitutional responsibilities the city continues to ignore.
Sheeler
I think that many are missing the real issue. Sheeler tried to bully the other advertisers to pull their ads. If he wants to do that as a private citizen then that is his prerogative. However since he did this with his council cap on, then he was WAY our of line. The [filtered word] contest between Green and Scheeler is one thing but bullying advertisers is another. Sheeler is and has always been, a loose canon. It will be interesting to see what other things he will come up with. If this gets swept under the rug there will be other issues before his term is up.
Bored
I'm bored with it.
A bunch of people with no real information going back and forth with what might have happened.
If the city council doesn't move forward with a hearing request, can we all just move on with the rest of our lives?
"Either person could bring civil or criminal action against the other."
If that happens, we might have some news. Until then, seems like a non-story.
It seems everyone knows "the facts" even though they all contradict each other. I'm bored with it.
Brainerd City Council doesn't move forward...
Doesn't that pretty much sum up 99% of what they do?
I based my response on the
I based my response on the news published in the Dispatch.
"Green said Scheeler canceled advertisements for Scheeler’s business on the station because of views Green expressed on his talk show." ... and because Scheeler had spoken to others about it.
from the 2/5/13 article:
"...Scheeler never demanded the program be taken off the air. Instead, he stopped the 90-second advertisements for his business a couple of weeks ago because he didn’t want to continue advertising on a station that attacked him by calling him names and criticizing his business... 'Mr. Scheeler has no obligation to advertise with a media entity in which he’s being personally attacked,' Shaw said."
"Jim Pryor of 3WI Radio said Green hasn’t had a contract with the radio station for nine months. Pryor declined to comment further."
"[Mayor] Wallin said Green’s comments at the council meeting were 'abusive' and said at an inappropriate time and place. '(Green) is bitter,' Wallin said. 'He was bitter because of not having his radio show. In reality, Gary (Scheeler) did what he wanted to do as a businessman...'"
If Mr. Scheeler used or referenced his city council seat, or if he threatened to hold hostage city contracts in the process, by all means get him. But the only one charging that is Green. The radio station hasn't come to his defense, and no business owners corroborate his version of events in print. Couldn't they have backed him up after the 2/5 article if it were true?
If Mr. Scheeler made a PRIVATE business decision in the best interest of his PRIVATE business, even though he also serves on the city council, that is his 1st amendment right.
Also, it is Mr. Green's first amendment right to criticize whomever he wants. It is not his right expect continued financial support from those he criticizes.
Reality Check
"we were all created in his name's" initial sentence in the 4:34 pm post says it all:
"I based my response on what was published in the Dispatch"
Here is a link to the Jan. 30th Koeping With Government show hosted by 3wi spokesman, Lon Schmidt. It dealt entirely with the Green / Scheeler controversy:
http://www.3wiradio.com/marypodcasts.html
01/30/2013 - Koeping with LON
It's well worth listening to the whole broadcast, but, if you are pressed for time, pick it up around the 14 minute mark. Most of the reporting in the Dispatch, and most statements from Alderman Scheeler are very credibly called into serious question. Hear for yourselves.
Fear and intimidation can go a long way in bending the truth, and even silencing it. A sitting City Council member has a lot of pull in a small town. If this can be done to Guy Green's livelihood, it can be done to anyone's. Maybe that is why the station hasn't come to his defense. Something to think about, isn't it?
Green
The self asorbed Guy Green seems to think that what he wants he should get. Making demands on the city government to do his bidding sets a new standard in chutzpah and narccissism. He seems to fail to understand that when you throw a punch (multiple ones in the case of Guy) people will punch back. The proverbial black eye on Guys face was acquired the old fashioned way...he earned it.
Time for someone to grow up
The people who are the focus of the story need to stop having their employees and friends post fictitious comments to boost their own image. It's interesting to hear one particular caller's remarks on Mr Green's show during what I believe was his final brodcast. I believe the man was from Pine River and there is a "connection" there.
why is this in the news
If green would spend the same amount of time seeking sponsors and supporters of his show, as he does trying to burry Scheeler for removing his ads. Green would probably spewing his SpeakEasy crap again.
Completely off the subject BOS
You are completely missing the reality of what has gone on here. Mr. Green made NO ATTEMPT to bury Schheler for removing ads. This is about the lies and deceit Mr. Scheeler partakes in, the coercion, the bullying and abuse of power. Mr. Scheeler used his power and position to stifle free speech, and stomp out those who exposed his antics. If Mr. Scheeler had not lied and deceived the people of north east Brainerd, none of this would have happened.
Remember, torpedo #2 is "away", tick tock tick tock, There is no turning back now.
Lucky to have
The citizens in Ward 3 are lucky to have Gary Scheeler. He follows up on all phone calls and complaints that are going on in his Ward. The folks in NE Brd. know that he is honest and hard working.
It looks like your program went overboard with the Boss of 3WI and got terminated.
If Mr Scheeler cancels his newspaper because of a article that is written he does not like? Is he wrong? If he complains to the press about a article written, is that wrong?
If someone gets fired at the newspaper is he responsible because he whined about what was written? What makes your program so untouchable? How many have you complained at some store. and what if that person got fired for your complaint is it your fault?
Knock it off folks and move on. Just a bunch of immature bloggers on here. A disgruntle employee I see here, right?