The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has an in-depth look at Tim Russell and his role in the “inner circle” of Gov. Scott Walker and local Republican politics — including his alleged work to defeat Pat Jursik in her run for the Milwaukee County Board.
Check out the story on Russell, one of three people charged in the ongoing John Doe investigation, here. From it:
Russell played a role in County Board campaigns, as well. Olen managed the 2007 board campaign of Chris Kujawa and said Russell was an adviser to the campaign. Thursday’s criminal charges against Russell said he had control over Kujawa’s campaign bank accounts and took $3,000 for personal use. Then, the complaint said, Russell used money intended for a county-run military appreciation day to repay Kujawa’s campaign.
Olen said he never became aware of any problems in the campaign’s books and was shocked by the charges.
Russell wasn’t listed in county records as treasurer for Kujawa’s race or the County Board candidacy of Larry Spicer in 2007, from whom Russell is charged with stealing $550. It was Pierick who held the formal title as Kujawa’s treasurer. Russell’s name, however, is attached to a copy of a bank statement for Kujawa. …
Pierick and Russell were referred to Kujawa at a time Walker was hoping to pick up a seat or two for conservatives on the County Board. Kujawa said Russell had offered to help with things like establishing a campaign account. Kujawa said he didn’t know Pierick well and seldom spoke to him.
“I really don’t recall the exact circumstances” of how Russell’s help came about, Kujawa said.
Supervisor Patricia Jursik, who defeated Kujawa, remains upset at what she views as the intervention of Walker and Russell in the County Board race.
“I was incensed by the whole way it was going down,” Jursik said.
South Milwaukee Blog 
Speaking of Jursik, why is South Milwaukee resisting placing the referendum question regarding downsizing the number of county supervisors, on the spring election ballot? You would think with total operating expenses up 47.8% for elections, the city could find a way to add the question to the ballot. Shouldn’t the citizenry have the right to decide how many supervisors sit on the county board?
Melanie: The City Council debated this at a meeting in December, and the issue died because it never came to a vote. Here is my blog post about it …
I did not support adding the question to the ballot, and I explain some of my reasoning in the post above.
I strongly support a smaller board, and I agree with you that the citizenry should have the right to decide how many supervisors are necessary — but only in a countywide referendum. The same question must be asked of all county residents for a referendum to carry real weight. Community-by-community advisory referendums on this issue will not lead to any change. Those reforms must come from the County Board itself, and I’m of the belief that the board will only listen if all voters speak. Otherwise, it strikes me as a waste of time.