MASON CITY – At-large councilman Scott Tornquist partially revealed long-standing personal relationships with the owners of Metalcraft at Tuesday night’s council meeting before voting “yes” on an incentive plan that could be worth as much as $775,000 for the company.
“For the benefit of my colleagues, and that I might avoid a potential problem for myself,” Tornquist said, “I want to disclose that I have a personal relationship with both owners,” of Metalcraft. (See YOUTUBE video below for more.)
The two owners of Metalcraft are Chief Executive Officer Doug Peterson and President Steve Doerfler.
Tornquist said that Doerfler lives directly next door to him in the Asbury neighborhood and have been neighbors for 19 years.
Tornquist only said of Peterson that they have attended the same church since about 1997. “So we’ve been friends for 15 years.”
“I just want to share that with you all,” Tornquist said to the rest of the council, never indicating that he was addressing the public specifically with the information.
“At no time during this process have the three of us either together or me individually with either one of them, discussed the terms of this development agreement,” Tornquist proclaimed. “Because I have recused myself from the process, I have every intent of voting on this development agreement, because I do not believe I have a conflict of interest.”
What Tornquist neglected to mention was that Peterson was the Treasurer for Tornquist’s council election campaign during the 2003 election and another campaign in 2007.
Peterson also gave $50.00 to Tornquist’s city council campaign in 2003, 2005 and 2009; Doerfler gave $100.00 in 2005.
Also, Waldo Smeby, former President of Metalcraft, gave Tornquist $50.00 in 2003 and again in 2005.
Metalcraft will construct a new 47,000 square foot facility on 9th Street SW near Menard’s. More on that story later.
——
NOTE: Former Mercy Director James Fitzpatrick gave Tornquist $250.00 in 2009 and $250.00 in 2005 and $100.00 in 2003. Mercy doctor Ron Moeller made contributions to Tornquist’s campaigns as well.
Watch YOUTUBE video:
i keep saying with m/c IT’S WHO YOU KNOW thats how things are done here…blue zone my ass….
I find it interesting the City Council gives Metalcraft incentives to relocate and then Metalcraft turns around and hires Snyder Construction to build the building, when Henkel does better work and is local. How about keeping that money in Mason City?? Let’s just hope Metalcraft isn’t in a hurry because it will take Snyder Construction FOREVER to build it.
I have a lot of problems with Scott on the council but this one is not one of them.
Vote this BUM out!!!
This is a good thing for Mason City. It’s hard not to know businessmen when you’re on the City Council. The political contributions were very small and hardly a payoff! Be happy we’re getting some business expansion and quit trying to find trouble where there is none.
NIT, once again, trying to cause controversy.
The treasurer of his campaign is not just a friend. He helped get him elected and now its pay back time.
Why would it have been so hard for Tornquist to just abstain from this vote? Come on, it just doesn’t look good. Use common sense. Working as a leader in the guy’s campaign? Really people?
All this talk about a conflict of interest–and there is at least the appearance of one, though I think Tornquist would have voted yes regardless–really is a sideshow to the ultimate problem of the city voting to subsidize a private company to the tune of $750,000.
Even the appearance of impropriety should have made Councilman Tornquist abstain from the issue. Anywhere else, this would raise huge red flags, and invite scrutiny into ever facet of the Councilman’s life. And it should.
This is not the first time in Council where an issue was before it, that the Councilman had private interests.
Where is his ethics? Where is the Council’s ethics?
Look back at his whole record, examine his votes, look for other conflicts. If has done it twice, perhaps there are others we forgot about.
And no, being a small town is no excuse. That would be like the Chicago Alderman saying, he has a small ward when he passes favorable legislation for campaign donors. Such things have landed them in Federal pens. Humbug I say!
The guy makes me sick. He thinks he sooo much better than anyone else. He couldn’t wait to say he knew these people like he is king crap!!! I don’t care if it was a close vote or not he should have never voted!! It is the idea that he waited until it was all over to say anything
Of course… never thought of that. If I rob a bank and then tell everyone about it that lets me off. I’m innocent! A legal loophole has been discovered!
I had no idea DP worked for Tornqist’s campaign for years and worked to get him elected. Guess that paid off. All 3 gave $ too even the former pres.
I am not a Turncoat fan but I think in this case it is a stretch to think it makes much difference who he knows. If the vote had been decided by one vote I would have felt differently. It kind of show his lack of integrity to let it go this far before confessing. If he thought no one would have found out he probably wouldn’t have said anything. At least that is my opinion of the guy.
Those donations were pretty small, so I don’t think there’s any financial incentive for Tornquist to vote either way.
Scott was upfront about his association with the owners, so I really feel it’s not a big deal. If Scott wouldn’t have released this information, the media would believe he was hiding it. He was damned if you do or damned if you don’t.
Plus, in a small community, people know each other and are going to have dual relationships. No big deal in my book.
Absolutely, no big deal.
So ethics has no place in Mason City or any other small town?
The right thing to do would be to get up and walk out until the subject was debated and voted. Until then, there is an appearance of impropriety.
What is the problem here? First of all, you failed to mention that the council voted unanimously. And 2nd of all, you also failed to mention that this is a $4,ooo,ooo expansion for Mason City. Even if Tornquist had not voted, it still would have passed. This is good news for Mason City, so why try to put all kinds of insinuations in the story but leave out important facts. And what do all those contributions have to do with this?
How does disclosing the relationship “avoid a potential problem…” for him? Looks like he just walked right into this. He does not believe he has a conflict of interest? Wow! This is going to be interesting.