Albany FFA makes learning sweet – Page 3 Group seeks referendum cut – Page 4 Honored drivers not just along for ride – Page 5
147528
Conservation pays for landowners – Page 2
The Brodhead Independent
REGISTER 922 W. Exchange Street Brodhead, WI 53520
608-897-2193
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
SHOPPING NEWS
www.randrautosales.net
608-934-5400
W2620 State Rd. 11/81 •Juda, WI. Auto Detailing Available
Run-off Feb. 16 will decide April 3 high court contenders The Wisconsin Supreme Court is the highest appeals court in the state. Seven justices, selected in nonpartisan elections for 10-year terms, sit on the state’s court of last resort. The court has jurisdiction over all other Wisconsin courts and can also hear original actions. Following the death of Justice N. Patrick Crooks, there was one vacancy on the court, for which three Wisconsin judges are now contending in the Tuesday, Feb. 16 primary. The supreme court has jurisdiction over original actions, appeals from lower courts, and regulation or administration of the practice of law in Wisconsin. Most commonly, the supreme court reviews cases that were appealed from the court of appeals. Here is a summary profile of each of the three candidates whose names you’ll find on the primary ballot next month: Rebecca Bradley has been briefly already a justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Bradley filed papers to run in the 2016 primary election, seeking election for her current position on the state’s high court. Gov. Scott Walker appointed her to the position after longtime Justice N. Patrick Crooks died suddenly in September 2015. Walker has twice before appointed Bradley to court positions. Bradley announced she’d run for the state’s high court when Crooks announced he would retire at the end of his term. Crooks died on Sept. 21, 2015. In October of that same year, Bradley filled Crooks’ seat after Walker appointed her. She was sworn in on Oct. 12, 2015. Bradley’s current term expires July 31, 2016. Walker appointed Bradley
to fill the vacancy on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals District I created by the death of Judge Ralph Adam REBECCA Fine in May BRADLEY 2015. Walker previously appointed her to the Milwaukee County Circuit Court to replace Judge Thomas Donegan, who retired on Nov. 30, 2012. Bradley earned her undergraduate degree in 1993 from Marquette University and her J.D. in 1996 from UW Law School. Bradley began her legal career as an attorney with the law firm of Hinshaw & Culbertson, where she represented physicians in malpractice lawsuits and defended individuals and businesses in product liability and personal injury litigation and appeals. She later joined the firm of Whyte Hirschboeck Dudek, where she concentrated her practice in commercial, information technology and intellectual property litigation and transactions, co-chaired the firm’s Technology Law Group, and worked as an American Arbitration Association Arbitrator. Bradley also served as Vice President of Legal Operations for an international software company. Bradley volunteered her services as an attorney to families of developmentally disabled youth in guardianship proceedings. She continues to serve on the Board of the Milwaukee Tennis & Education Foundation, which provides opportunities for central-city children to play tennis, improve academic performance and develop life skills and values.
In 2012, Justice Bradley completed a 6-year term with the Milwaukee Forum, a diverse group of leaders whose JOE DONALD dialogue and involvement is designed to enhance greater racial understanding and improve the well-being of the Milwaukee
community. Joe Donald is a judge for the Milwaukee County Circuit Court in Wisconsin. He was first JOANNE F. KLOPPENBURG a p p o i n t e d to the position in 1996 by former Governor Tommy Thompson (R) and was elected in 1997. Donald was
most recently re-elected in 2015 for a term that will expire in 2021. Donald attended Shorewood High School and went on to earn his B.A. from Marquette University in 1982. Later, he earned his J.D. from the Marquette University School of Law in 1988. He was previously an assistant city attorney for the City of Milwaukee, 1989 to 1996, after clerking
See CONTENDERS, Page 2
Is it important to vote in the February and April elections? I’ve not met anyone in life who’s sought justice before the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Yet with and for my neighbors, family, children – for their health and safety, I have done so. An elected town board, their appointed planning and zoning board members, too, stood with our rural community, with my neighbors and me in that appeal. Scientists who helped compile 2,500 pages of evidence, some working for nothing, others for reduced fees, presented the evidence to a local judge in a circuit court. It seemed clear. It seemed entirely convincing. -A polluted creek with 20 times the level of nitrate that the federal Environmental Protection Agency warns is dangerous to all forms of life. -Three polluted wells, one of them triple unsafe drinking levels, the other two serving households with children, infants, young mothers – ages whose health is especially
New Hours Effective
MARCH 1st
Monday - Friday | 8:30am - 5:30pm Saturday | 8:30am - 12:00pm
The Banking Standard: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow Belleville • Brodhead • Juda • Monroe • New Glarus
233134
Tony Ends EDITOR
endangered. -Five times an adequate level of phosphorus in soil on more than 1,500 acres of cropland. An emeritus professor of soil and water science testified that it would easily take 15 to 18 years of resting the land – with no fertilizer applications whatsoever – to return minerals in that soil to normal. That local judge sided with the people. He ruled that the town’s request to condition the industry with practices to restore safety and health to soil and water, were within its right and responsibility. On appeal, however, before three justices in Madison, the local people’s circuit court ruling was overturned. One justice sat mute the entire time of oral arguments. Another didn’t even understand what state agency was with the industry against the local people. All three narrowly considered a poorly written state law, over public health and safety and a town’s rights to look out for public interest before people are sickened or even die. Our people and our town somehow summoned the courage to appeal to the state Supreme Court to restore the local judge’s ruling. The whole process took years, and a sudden turn near its end. It was made public that one of the seven high court justices had been represented in an ethics charge against him for free. The attorney who advised the justice was the same lawyer who represented the industry against our people. Organizations and people from around the state called (with attorneys representing our people) for that Supreme Court justice to recuse himself. We asked him to step away from our case.
Wisconsin law does not allow other members of the high court to decide whether a justice confronted with an apparent conflict of interest should back away, for instance, from hearing his own attorney argue some case before him. A challenged justice can state that he’s considered the charge, and found it to be without merit. He decides for himself that the charge is not true, or true. He can stay on in the case, or remove himself. The other high court justices can weigh, and in this instance did try to determine, whether the justice had really considered the charge against himself. The other six Wisconsin Supreme Court justices in our case deadlocked, 3 to 3, over whether the challenged justice had seriously reflected on what he was doing. His “ruling” on the conflict of interest in our case consisted of not much more than a statement that he’d thought about the charge and pronounced it without merit. Just weeks before rendering a final ruling on our case, the other six justices also deadlocked over whether to require the case to be heard a second time. In the end, the justice who listened to our opposition’s arguments – presented before him by an attorney who’d given him free legal advice, wrote the ruling against our people and our town. We lost our appeal. It’s not, of course, the end of the story. In February’s runoff and April’s final voting, you will help write the next chapter. Even if you stay away from the polls, you’ll be helping others decide which one of three people sits on the state Supreme Court. Don’t think it doesn’t matter. In the most vital cases appealed to Wisconsin’s highest court over the next 10 years, it will matter. In every vital case affecting our lives, we’ve all appealed to the state Supreme Court. Vote in February. Vote again in April, so that justice can be heard.