Aldermen From District 5's Past Ask for A Change For the Future

John Engelhardt should replace Dan Soltysiak, say several former aldermen from Muskego's 5th District.

To the Editor/District 5 Residents,

We are writing you to give our strong support to John Engelhardt for District 5 Alderman.

John Engelhardt possesses the maturity, ethics, fiscal restraint and has the leadership qualities to represent District 5 on the common council. For the past 23 years John Engelhardt has made Muskego his home. He has raised a family here, built a church and devoted his life to serving our community. As a fiscal conservative, John knows the value of a dollar and will make sure that each taxpayer dollar is spent wisely. More importantly, John Engelhardt will not simply vote “No” or “Yes” on proposals, simply based on whose idea it is. He will analyze issues, give input and alternative solutions and vote how his constituents want him to. John knows that he will be working for you, the taxpayers of District 5.

John Engelhardt is also committed to building our business tax base, to help relieve property taxes for families and homeowners.

We believe John Engelhardt will help end the dysfunctional working relationship that a few members of this current city council have fostered over the past two years. Government is about lively, vigorous debate of the issues, but when all is done, it should not be turned into personal attacks and political alliances at the expense of those you were elected to represent. We believe John Engelhardt will put an end to those tactics and move Muskego forward in a positive direction.

Please join us on April 3 in voting for John Engelhardt for District 5 Alderman.


Rick Petfalski, District 5 Alderman - 2001 to 2004          
Common Council President – 2002 to 2004

Bob Melcher, District 5 Alderman - 2004 to 2008
Common Council President - 2005-2006, 2007-2008

Bill Schneider, District 5 Alderman - 1992-1994, 2008-2010

Lib Hater March 20, 2012 at 11:26 AM
Finally, some real community leaders speak out. I agree with their analysis about Mr. Englehart. I have found him to be all they say he is and more. I strongly agree that the fraction on the council, though started by only three of the seven are going out of their way to simply obstruct government instead of working with the Mayor to make it better. The Lake Park issue is a much broader discussion then the poor residents of Bay Breeze want to realize. What if the developer for their condos would have been told no? Most wouldnt have ever been able to be on the lake. 75% of the community either has no opinion or are for it. Leadership can be lonely at times!!
Simple Bacon March 20, 2012 at 01:51 PM
The irony is too difficult to pass up. Three aldermen from the past wish for change in the future? The fact that Soltysiak has riled up the good-ole-boy establishment is telling and probably a good thing. So, far we've established that John Englehardt is a nice guy. I agree, he is a nice guy. But is that all there is to being an effective alderman? Would having a nice guy on the council change the tenor of the discussion and is that really good representation? Look back at Soltysiak's record and listen to the audio of the council meetings. If you agree with the stands he taken, or if you yourself are asking some of the same questions then vote for him. If you don't agree with his voting record or with the questions he asks then don't vote for him. To say that the way he asks the questions is reason for a change is naive or maybe self serving. The esteemed former aldermen didn't seem to have any issue with the the voting record of Soltysiak they would simply like the council to be a nicer place. Personally, I believe there are times when you have to stand up and go against the grain. It would be easy, and a waste of taxpayer dollars, to simply vote with the majority. We have aldermen now that rarely speak and never ask any questions. It would seem their minds are made up prior to having arrived at the meeting. District 5 residents need to attend tonights forum and ask both of the candidates to answer the difficult questions. If they can't then don't vote for them.
JBean March 20, 2012 at 01:53 PM
I disagree. Seems Mr. Englehart’s discussions are just as wishy washy as District 1’s alderman. Depending on who he is talking to you he gives a different answer to the question. Going back to the good old boys club is NOT the way to go. Dan has been excellent for is district and really cares about what the people have to say. The others on the council are hard headed and don’t welcome communications to bring an issue to a COW meeting. They are the ones the want to push things through without listening to the people. The dysfunctional working relationship belongs to others not Dan. Vote for Dan!!!
Jerv6 March 20, 2012 at 03:03 PM
You hit the nail on the head Steve. You, the three past aldermen and John Engelhardt all support the Lake Park. Alderman Soltysiak voted against it. Simple to see why you want to replace him. Your only problem is that 75% of the community are opposed to it. Do you really think two school referendums were voted down to build a park instead?
Rick Petfalski March 20, 2012 at 06:30 PM
Jerv6, Do not put words in my mouth. I have NOT supported the lake park proposal. I have been clear with my concerns about it from the beginning. Having said that, this race is about more than one issue, and if it is, it seems both candidates are on the same page based on Alderman's Soltsiak's vote to delay and study the proposal further, rather than amend the resolution to kill it all together now, as he could have done. Mr. Engelhardt has expressed his thought that the process was moving too quickly and needed more input from citizens and more information from the city before advancing any further. He has also stated that since the city has chosen the path they are on, he will work hard to make sure all questions are answered, and will then vote how his district wishes him to if he is elected. That issue aside, I simply believe that John Engelhardt is the better candidate to represent the people of district 5 and allow this community to heal and move forward in a more civil tone. As I stated, there is nothing wrong with opposing, vigorous debate of the issues. But once a vote happens, move on and work on the next issue - respectfully. The tone and actions of a few on this council simply do not dignify the office they hold.
The Anti-Alinsky March 20, 2012 at 09:53 PM
So it's the other six on the council, not Soltysiak that is the problem.
Rick Petfalski March 20, 2012 at 10:47 PM
If you are inferring that Bob Melcher, Bill Schnieder and I form a "Good old boys" club, you clearly didn't follow our aldermanic careers. All three of us had very different views, styles and opinions. We almost never had contact with one another, and none of us made public support of the other during elections that I am aware of. We were honored to serve the 5th District, and when we were done, we stayed out of the aldermanic election process. I think the fact that all three of us find common ground in the belief that John Engelhardt is better suited for the job speaks volumes to character of John Engelhardt.
Lib Hater March 21, 2012 at 10:42 PM
For the record, I dont have an official stance on the Lake Park. Dig a bit further on each of the candidates backgrounds before you decide. It will be crystal clear if you do your homework.
DB March 22, 2012 at 06:20 PM
I have issues with a religious leader running for public office. It is not that I have issues with a candidate being a member, even a very active member, of a "flock," but that in this case he is the "SHEPHARD" of a "flock." By the very nature of his job Mr. Englehardt holds a position to influence the hearts and minds of his "flock." This Nation was founded on the concept of separation of church and state, and I believe it was ill-advised for Mr. Englehardt to throw his hat into this ring. An Alderman should be led by the needs and wishes of his/her constituents, and in this case I believe Mr. Englehardt has too much opportunity to influence the beliefs of others. If he were elected, I would wonder who is leading who?
The Warrior March 22, 2012 at 06:34 PM
Interesting thought DB. However, anyone with strong spiritual or religious beliefs and in any position of power--political or not--could use them to influence others. Maybe his beliefs and the person John is can help mend our community?
The Anti-Alinsky March 22, 2012 at 11:01 PM
Actually DB, there were two mains reasons for the separation of church and state. First, as stated in the clause make no law respecting an establishment of religion was to prevent congress from collecting taxes to support a state religion that others wouldn't support (Thomas Jefferson's main argument). The clause "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" was intended to allow ministers. priests... to practice the tenets of their religion uninhibited. In neither of these clause is "separation of church and state" actually stated. Having a minister as an elected official is not a bad thing. The 20th president was an ordained minister. Many of our founding fathers were deacons or church leaders. As an alderman, I would hope Mr. Englehardt to use his Christian values to bring a semblance of civility back to the common council. While I am not surprised the common council has differences, there are better ways of fostering dialog than what has been going on.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something