JUDGE DUMPS BONDAR CLAIM AGAINST D'AMATO

Special to the Readers of www.milwaukeeworld.com

By Michael Horne

Ald. Michael D'Amato had an election eve vindication on Monday, March 31st, 2008 when United States Magistrate Judge William E. Callahan, Jr. [Marquette Law, '73] granted his renewed motion for summary judgment in Case No. 2006-cv-00109 Bondar v. D'Amato.
The plaintiffs, Bernie Bondar, Dennis Bondar, Jill Bondar and Mike Bondar, sued D'Amato, the outgoing 3rd District alderman, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin alleging D'Amato removed a sign posted by Jill Bondar opposing the East Village Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District zoning sponsored by D'Amato; that he challenged the license of Wolski's, the Bondar family tavern that will celebrate its centennial this year; and that he otherwise "engaged in a campaign of petty harassment of the Bondars."
The overlay district zoning was approved by the Milwaukee Common Council in December, 2004 over the opposition of the Bondars and some other neighbors of the 16-block area of the Lower East Side. The Bondars, owners of numerous properties in the neighborhood, argued against the zoning saying it would have increased the cost of making changes to buildings they owned, and especially "would have prevented property owners from combining or dividing lots without special approval from the Department of City Development." This latter provision was of particular interest, since it could be argued that the Bondars could have combined a number of contiguous properties by right to develop a much larger property than the new zoning permits. Thus have been dashed the hopes for the Pulaski Street High Rises. "These special regulations and rules subtracted from the value of all property within the Overlay District Project," they argued.
Jill Bondar attached a 10" x 20" inch sign opposing the zoning on a city-owned tree in front of her house at 1227 E. Kane Pl. that read, "No! Overlay District!!!! Alderman D'Amato." While touring the neighborhood in September 2004 with his then-aide, D'Amato caused the sign to be removed. He called Jill Bondar, left a message informing her that he had the sign and that she could claim it to post it legally, if she desired. This led to a number of complaints by the Bondars against D'Amato, all of which were dismissed by the court on June 11th, 2007, with the exception of the issue of the sign. The court said those arguments could proceed on the basis that D'Amato violated the Bondars' First Amendment rights by "selectively enforcing the [municipal] ordinance against" posting the signs, specifically targeting theirs while others remained.
D'Amato replied he would have time for little else if he removed every sign illegally occupying the public way. The Bondars then submitted photographs taken in 2008 in which they located illegal signs, including one for Sam McGovern-Rowen that remained unmolested across the street from D'Amato's house for several weeks, and another at the construction site for Kane Place Commons, being developed from Jill Bondar's house by Julilly Kohler, and the subject of another federal case in which the Bondars have an interest. The judge found these complaints to be irrelevant to the case in hand, being removed in time, distance and subject matter from the issues.
Judge Callahan ruled that "even assuming that D'Amato's efforts to personally 'enforce' the ordinance were shown to be something less than consistent, such general showing would go nowhere in demonstrating that persons similarly situated to Jill Bondar and who were in favor of the Overlay District Project were treated differently by D'Amato than she was treated. ... the bottom line is that the plaintiffs have failed to produce evidence from which a reasonable trier of fact could conclude that persons who posted signs in favor of the Overlay District Project were treated differently by D'Amato than she was treated. ...
"In conclusion, the defendant's renewed motion for summary judgment must be granted for the simple reason that, despite making a noble effort to do so, the plaintiffs have failed to produce sufficient evidence to satisfy the first element of a selective enforcement claim."
The Bondars were represented by Paul A. Kinne [UW '93] and Robert J. Gingras [UW '81] of the Gingras Cates and Luebke firm of Madison. D'Amato was represented by Jan A. Smokowicz [UW '80]of the City Attorney's office.
Let's see how newly elected alderman Nik Kovac navigates the Pulaski Street Political Minefield, and if threatened plans to repeal the overlay zoning ever materialize.
Jill Bondar still displays anti-D'Amato signs at her residence. These are legally posted, and are changeable. Until a few months ago, one sign read, "Impeach D'Amato." As soon as the alderman announced his plans to not seek reelection, she replaced the sign with a new one that read, "Indict D'Amato."

FUN FACT!

Did you know that Ald. Michael D'Amato was staying in the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. on the very day the Elliot Spitzer prostitute scandal broke? It's true!
--Michael Horne