Patterson, Wagers, Kuhn and PAC Financing

Patterson's Response to LCHPAC & Loveland Magazine

It is apparent that those who chose to comment on our recent letter to Loveland Magazine have missed the point and do not know the Pattersons. This was NOT a personal attack or meant to offend anyone.  When a person applies for a position on City Council, the voters should consider the resume, experience in fiscal responsibility and qualifications for the position. Due diligence is required and that is what we have done not on just one, but all candidates. The example was shared due to the candidate’s record in fiscal experience and was obtained from public records.
The point of our letter is to urge voters to be an informed voter and perform their due diligence. 

4 PAC CANDIDATES, THIS DOESN’T SEEM RIGHT.

Name: Anna Wagers

Message:
Mr. Canada, I have been reading Lovelandtruth.com and I'm very appreciative that other information is available to the community. I am very troubled by the 4 signs together and hope you will print this comment. It’s interesting that in the city of Loveland, a 4 male, “good ole boy” ticket is being forced down my throat — 4 signs together, 4 names together on a flyer, 4 candidates endorsed by a Political Action Committee (PAC) This doesn’t seem right. It takes 4 to make a majority on council so the same people who complained about a past majority of council, now want to create their own. The reason is very clear—Rob Weisgerber who leads the ticket and was first elected in 1995 wants to be mayor again. Just incredible that these 4 think they can do better yet offer no solutions. So let’s look at the 4— Weisgerber whose decade’s long record on council is at best dismal who’s only vision for the city was to spend, spend taxpayer money and then tried to saddle taxpayers with a 25% income tax increase. Check the facts—he was mayor. Next, Ted Phelps who attends council meetings but doesn’t know what he votes on ( see Dec 2016 meeting) , offers nothing of substance and votes with Weisgerber; and then the two hangers-on Neal Oury ( who clearly has financial issues) and Tim Butler with no experience, no platform but ready and willing to rubber stamp their leader’s every whim. If you favor term limits take matters into your own hands this election—don’t vote for Weisgerber who’s been with us for years and say no to his pre-determined ticket. Why would I vote for the ticket of 4 when there are 4 other candidates worthy of my vote? Thank you! 


Anna Wagers

Loveland Resident
 

Respones from Tim Canada & Barry Kuhn

From: Tim Canada

After undertaking this adventure of distributing the Truth to Loveland voters I vetted all candidates. Three candidates came up up with public records listed on the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts Website. Neal Oury, Barry Khun, and Rob Weisgerber all had court information on the public record. I did not contact Neal Oury because it was clear his issues were related to business decisions and had direct correlation to managing taxpayer investment in the City of Loveland. After reviewing the records of Rob Weisgerber, I felt that the issues presented were not pertinent to the city's business in 2017 and going forward. I did contact Barry Kuhn about his issues and determined those issues were created by a divorce and loss of a job. They were not pertinent to his ability to perform the responsibilities of a city council person. I also took into consideration Barry's outstanding performance on the finance committee.


Barry Kuhn

11:26 AM (12 hours ago)


Halie,
You are correct. 
Due to a divorce, and a job loss, I have also had financial difficulties. I was a single parent without outside financial support in raising my two daughters. It is important to note that 99% of those cases were dismissed, and I paid all of my debts in full.  I had also elected to take the high road, and maintain my focus on the issues and not the individuals. I'll continue down that path, and it is unfortunate  that the LCHPAC has decided to change their stance, and now go after individuals. I know a great many of individuals that have contributed to the PAC, and count them as my friends. I think that they would be disappointed in the change in the LCHPAC's approach. I would also hope that the candidates that the LCHPAC supports would also not endorse this approach.


Tim,
Feel free to cite court cases on your website. I have stated previously that my life is an open book. I have nothing to hide, and proud of myself for fighting the challenges that I faced during that time period. I have been encouraging residents to research each candidate on their own merits, and this public information has been available to them already.
Thanks.

Hollywood is Financing the PAC - Yes, that Hollywood!

Early on in this campaign season I was reading the LCHPAC website and a writer posted follow the money. So I decided to do just that. Here is what the Ohio Campaign Report for LCHPAC filed on October 30th says:


$2505 was received since the last filing

$2000 was received from one TV Executive on 07/05/2017 from Los Angeles, CA


**This single donation equals 79.84% of the funds received this filing period**


*** Of the $4307.81 raised by the PAC, 46.427% came from Hollywood!


****Five additional donors came from outside the city which totaled 31.25%****


This proves the PAC has a double standard. They post threats to businesses whose owners live outside the city even though those owners have invested, paid taxes, provided employment and provide entertainment to the City of Loveland. On Facebook, they tell employees of businesses living outside the city limits to stay out of the city's politics. Yet they receive almost 50% of their total funding from one person living in Los Angeles, CA. Makes you wonder how the candidates finance reports look? 


Stay tuned!