Kammerzelt sets time and place for Paris Town Board recall debate

Paris town Supervisor Ron Kammerzelt firmed up plans for a debate before the Nov. 22 Town Board recall election, but he might be kind of lonely that night.

Kammerzelt said, in an email we received Friday, a debate will take place Thursday, Nov. 10 at Paris School, starting at 6:30 p.m. In a follow-up message Kammerzelt said there will be a moderator, questions will come from the audience and all candidates were invited.

A spokesman for recall candidates Joseph Kolnik, Robert Fliess and Paul Terry said those men will not participate in the debate:

Joe Kolnik, Bob Fliess and Paul Terry respectfully decline the incumbents request for a debate because for over a year, residents have endured secrecy from the incumbents including failing to answer public information requests in a helpful and timely manner as directed by law. The town board has promoted suppression of both a referendum and a recall petition while continuing to insist on allocating millions of cash to the Village of Somers.”

Calls made to incumbent Chairman Virgil Gentz and Supervisor Ken Monson to see if they planned to participate were unsuccessful. There was no answer at Monson’s number from the town website. A message was left on Gentz’s voicemail.

After a July Town Board meeting when Kammerzelt first proposed a debate, Gentz and Monson said they would participate if the date did not present a conflict. Kolnik and Terry, in attendance at the meeting, said they wanted to think about it.

UPDATE — Monson and Gentz both confirmed Monday they plan to participate.



  1. Northwestern Mike says:

    Paris Pundit,
    Challengers decline a debate.

  2. Northwestern Mike says:

    Here is what I have learned about Joe Kolnik’s claim that “My father helped create the deal with the landfill (that Paris still takes advantage of) for low taxes.”

    Paul Kolnik, Joe’s father, was a Paris town supervisor for 7 terms or 14 years. Virgil Gentz lost to Paul Kolnik in 1977, but beat him in April 1979 to be town supervisor.

    The original landfill in Paris was privately owned by Kenosha Trucking owned by Ernest Infusino. In June 1979 after Paul Kolnik lost to Virgil Gentz, the private landfill was ordered closed by the WDNR and the county looked at buying this site for a county wide landfill.

    January 9, 1980 it was reported that the landfill property was sold by Kenosha Trucking owned by Ernest Infusino family to Waste Management. The old landfill site was closed and covered by Waste Management.

    In the fall of 1981 plans were made to expand the landfill. July 9,1982 the agreement between Waste Management and the Town of Paris was witnessed by August Zirbel, Mark Wisnefski, and Virgil Gentz.

    Orlando Infusiono, Town Clerk of the Town of Paris certified the Agreement was approved by the Town Board of Paris on the 9th day of July, 1982.

    The landfill was in private hands when Joe Kolnik’s father was a Paris town supervisor. After his election defeat to Virgil Gentz in April 1979 the private landfill was closed and sold to Waste Management. The agreement between Waste Management and the town was signed when Joe’s father was no longer a town supervisor.

    This story was sourced by the Kenosha News Archives and the Waste Management Agreement.

    You decide if Joe’s claim is true. I think it is false.

    I wonder if this is why they declined to debate.

  3. Northwestern Mike says:

    Signs supporting the town board will be available before the election.

    I am taking sign requests.

  4. Very Typical of Reckless Ron says:

    If Reckless Ron has some secret logic to explain his actions, he doesn’t have to wait for November 10th to explain.

    He seems to know how to get a message out – why not do it on this forum where we can read it in our schedule?

  5. Northwestern Mike says:

    cluck, cluck, cluck, CLUCKAAAAAWWWWK!

    buack buack buack buack!

    I know I am terrible.

  6. Reckless Ron strikes ahain says:

    When Reckless Ron wants something, he inconsiderately forces it on everyone.

    We’ve all seen him do the same thing with:
    1) the Uline deal back in 2015.
    2) the Paris / Somers IGA back on April 8th of 2016 and
    3) now a debate nobody agreed to attend.

    Bless you Reckless Ron – if nothing else, you’re at least consistent.

  7. NW Mike alluded to this says:

    NW Mike alluded to an election at the school back on October 27th at 11:39am.

    When did Gentz and Monson learn of these plans? I’m assuming Kammerzelt coordinated with the Town Supervisor and his peer Monson.

  8. Any more insights NW Mike? says:

    Dissemination of information in the Town of Paris:

    1) Kammerzelt
    2) NW Mike
    3) Gentz
    4) Monson
    5) residents of Paris

  9. Paris Pundit says:

    Ron should enjoy being up at the “bully pulpit” all by himself!!

  10. Paris Pundit says:

    A “debate” normally involves at least 2 participants, usually from different sides of an issue, hence the debate/discussion of the issues. Since it appears Ron will be “debating” himself, I believe a more accurate description of this event HE arranged would be a “soliloquy”: “the act of talking to oneself”. Should be entertaining watching Ron try to bully himself!!! “WHERE’S THE BEEF”????

  11. Northwestern Mike says:

    From Paris Pundit,

    “@Northwestern Mike: Still at the old “bait and switch” game…you still have not provided ANY EVIDENCE that shows the entire Town board wants a debate or that the 3 challengers are “afraid to debate”(your words, not mine!). We anxiously await your response.”

    To Paris Pundit,

    Is this story an adequate response?

  12. Northwestern Mike says:

    Dear Any more insights NW Mike,

    I call or visit with the town supervisors to get information to share here just like you can, but don’t.

  13. Northwestern Mike says:

    Paris Pundit,

    Not commenting as Perplexed in Paris? Using new names today?

    Regarding the debate, I know your complaints well enough from countering them for months to offer your side at the debate.

    Be assured a discussion will happen even without the challengers.

  14. Less Affected Resident says:

    I wonder if he will be able to hold back his displeasure toward the twilight zone residents.

    On a side note, did anyone in the original twilight zone receive the ridiculous letter from the town board overemphasizing how informative they are about the new agreement? Because I didnt. I guess my vague certified letter will come at a later day right before it passes. History will repeat itself without change.

  15. Reckless Ron was practicing talking to himself at the last meeting when he took off his commissioner hat and crossed the room to speak as a resident. Now we know why! Oh and I’m sure he asked the opponents what time and location, moderator and format suited them….not!

    How is it consistent to try and oppose an election at every stage and then say you want a debate about said election? The people have heard enough and just want them to resign.

  16. Northwestern Mike says:

    I was told today all three incumbents will attend the debate.

    Questions from the audience will be handed to the moderator who will ask the questions. Questions deemed inappropriate by the moderator will not be asked. The moderator has final say just like the chairman at an Annual Meeting.

    I do not remember the moderator’s name, but I believe he is an ex-law enforcement official.

    Where are the challengers? buack buack buack buack!

  17. Paris Pundit says:

    @Northwestern Mike: 1. You stated the challengers were “afraid” to debate(your words not mine…..look at your past postings). The challengers have decided NOT to debate. Where is your PROOF they are “AFRAID”. 2. You stated “the BOARD called for a debate”. ONE BOARD MEMBER DID….and it’s not even certain if he did so as an official board action or as a “private citizen”. You have YET to show that the ENTIRE BOARD called for this debate. “WHERE’S THE BEEF”.

  18. Paris Pundit says:

    @Northwestern Mike: Please tell us taxpayers WHO is paying for the expenses related to the debate? Hall rental? Printing costs? Please don’t tell me “the hall is free”…. lights, heat, air conditioning, maintenance staff…..et al are part of our school taxes…..so unless somebody else(eg the candidate(s)) is picking up the tab…kind of looks like a conflict of interest.

  19. Less Affected Resident says:

    Seems like this debate could get biased with this moderator picking and choosing what questions are appropriate. Anything dealing with the betrayal of the twilight residents might be deemed inappropriate.

  20. Nothing new in Paris says:

    Mike, What you are saying about them all attending is heresay. Let’s see them come out and commit to the public. But I do believe they might show up now that the challengers have stated they are not interested in a debate. Too little, too late.
    I don’t know why it’s being held at the school. I guess Roger is just too nice to say no.
    Also, I would bet that the moderator was picked by Ron and has been instructed on what is inappropriate. And I would bet that the town board has spent CONSIDERABLE town finances with the lawyer to prepare for this debate. Let’s see if they can spend it all before November 22!

  21. Northwestern Mike says:

    Sunday November 6, 2016 9:55pm

    Read above comment

  22. Perplexed in Paris says:

    @Northwestern Mike…….it seems your agitation is growing…..read your posts…..you are all over the map and consistently FAIL to answer questions posed to you in a legitimate fashion. Many of us in Paris are “perplexed”…..we welcome you to our club. You were downright besides yourself that a debate would not take place(read your previous posts)….and now are downright giddy that a “debate”(if that’s what you want to call it) will take place. Let me quote you: “buack buack buack buack, cluck, cluck, cluck, CLUCKAAAAAWWWWK. Your words, not mine. To quote Paris Pundit “WHERE’S THE BEEF”!!! Time to take your meds now. Calm down. Cluck.

  23. Paris Pundit says:

    The challengers CLEARLY stated WHY they would not participate in a “debate”. Being “afraid” was not listed as one of the reasons. Since they had enough gumption to stand up to the bullies, can’t quite understand Northwestern Mike’s contention that they are “afraid”. FEAR does not appear to be part of their makeup.

  24. Another Paris Resident says:

    I continue to be amazed at the lack of thoughtful and insightful responses put out here by many. This is a rock solid situation – the incumbents have asked for and scheduled a debate with the challengers. The challengers are refusing to partake. Why? The point isn’t whether they are ‘afraid’ or not, the point is they are not attending. I have yet to see one solid, defensible reason on why they refuse to engage – including the pathetic ‘response’ they proffered here. The real reason they will not attend – because it would become completely transparent that they are not fit to hold public office.

  25. Northwestern Mike says:

    A surefire way to stop a debate is to not post comments in a timely fashion.

    I have to hand it you Darren, you have succeeded.

    Maybe that is your intention. Thanks.

  26. Paris Pundit says:

    I see Northwestern Mike had adopted the Republican strategy of “blaming the press” for everything. Donald Trump wrote the book on it. If you go back and see how many posts NWM has submitted over the last few months, and WOTI has printed, seems kind of LUDICROUS to chastise the editor for not posting comments in a “timely fashion”. That old “bully mentality” flourishes once again. “WHERE’S THE BEEF”?!

  27. Paris Pundit says:

    @Another Paris resident: Nice try….the “incumbents have asked for and scheduled a debate with the challengers”(your words, not mine). Really. Ron K. all but DEMANDED a “debate”…he did not “ask” for one. And the other 2 board members DID NOT “ask” for it. They stated they “might” participate, and now it appears that they will. Pretty pompous of you to think that YOUR COMMENTS are “thoughtful and insightful” and that the rest of ours are just gibberish. Lets give you the benefit of the doubt, you claim the challengers won’t participate because “it would become completely transparent that they are not fit to hold public office”. If you are right, then why in the heck WOULD they participate????? Alas, the challengers have THWARTED the bullying attempt by Ron K. to demand they attend HIS “debate”, to delight of many, the chargin of a few, yourself included.

  28. Paris Pundit says:

    It has just been announced that snacks will be served after the debate at the school. The menu will feature sour grapes, slices of humble pie, Scott Walker Kool-Aid, and
    meatless hamburgers. “WHERE’S THE BEEF”!!!

  29. Another Paris Resident says:

    Paris Pundit – I honestly don’t even know how to try to reply…… Please re-read your last post about the debate – seriously dude. . . . . .

    Why would it matter if one or all three incumbents asked for the debate, the point is they are all in – and the challengers are no where to be seen.

    And you’re comment about “If you are right, then why in the heck WOULD they participate?????” How about explaining that one? If I’m right and they are unfit to hold public office – and BTW I have YET to see their qualifications – then that is indeed precisely why they won’t show up. If they are qualified, then show up and demonstrate to the residents of Paris that you can handle the position. . . .

  30. Debates are not advertised before both parties agree to the day, time and moderator. In this case Reckless Ron has been reckless and done what he wanted. As ever, the Paris Town Board tells people what to do – not ask.

  31. Nothing new in Paris says:

    Hmmm. From what I have read, the “challengers” made it public Sunday that they decline to attend Ron’s Debate and then on Monday, Gentz and Monson confirm that they will show up. Interesting… the timing is very suspect. Nothing new.

  32. Paris Pundit says:

    @Another Paris Resident: “dude”???????????

  33. Another Paris Resident says:

    Paris Pundit – Let me guess, you’re a liberal, right? The point isn’t that I used a social eloquence term, the point is why would it matter if one or three incumbents asked for the debate? And why didn’t the challengers show up to the debate?

    Some residents that IMHO don’t fully comprehend all that has taken place, and why, may not be happy with the incumbents – however I for one am extremely nervous of the potential of having three unqualified individuals running our Town……

  34. Paris Pundit says:

    @Another Paris Resident: You need to chill out..”dude”. You state that you are “extremely nervous”(your words, not mine). Calm down now………..there…..isn’t that better?

  35. Paris Pundit says:

    @Another Paris Resident: Given that you are suffering from borderline apoplexy symptoms(extremely nervous)….you may want to consider seeking medical attention. I seriously doubt that reading the opinions posted on West of the I on any particular issue, especially mine, will do anything to RELIEVE your ANXIETY. Dude.

  36. Paris Pundit says:

    @Another Paris Resident: You refer to me as “dude”, then assert “let me guess, you’re a liberal, right”? Wow man……that is “far out”. Must make me a “liberal dude”. Awesome. “WHERE’S THE BEEF”??????????????????

  37. Northwestern Mike says:

    Paris Pundit said:
    “Given that you are suffering from borderline apoplexy symptoms(extremely nervous)….you may want to consider seeking medical attention. I seriously doubt that reading the opinions posted on West of the I on any particular issue, especially mine, will do anything to RELIEVE your ANXIETY. Dude.”

    I am amazed how often you resort to a personal attack when you refuse to respond to a legitimate concern.

  38. Paris Pundit says:

    @Northwestern Mike: cluck cluck cluck cluck cluck…baawwk baawwk baawwk.. guess your “personal attacks” on Darren don’t count…according to your post times, looks like you’ve been busy “stacking” comments. Enjoy.

  39. Northwestern Mike says:

    Paris Pundit,
    My my, you got caught.

  40. Northwestern Mike says:

    Another Paris Resident,

    I would like to get in touch.

    Please email me at Northwesternmike@yahoo.com with your contact information and I will contact you.


  41. Another Paris Resident says:

    The classic losing position of “the best defense is to go on the offensive.” Not surprised as I have yet to get answers to my direct questions. No point in pushing it further – “I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed, uniformed person.” (:

  42. Northwestern Mike says:

    Paris Pundit,

    I see nothing wrong with ‘stacking comments’ using the same name, but when it is done to give the appearance multiple people are commenting, it is deceptive.

  • Follow us on

  • Archives