Yesterday, Kurt Fankhauser surrendered in the voter fraud challenge and changed his address, avoiding a hearing altogether. It’s a step forward — one that resolves an issue Bucyrus didn’t need hanging over its council president. Yet, as with many of Fankhauser’s actions, this move doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
If Kurt were to speak on the matter, he might claim the city has more pressing concerns than determining his residency. But it’s a tough argument to make for someone who’s built a reputation on scrutinizing others and, at times, amplifying allegations that crumble under even the slightest scrutiny. His focus on these issues has often overshadowed the valid work he’s done, leaving many to see him as the “boy who cried wolf.”
This perception isn’t baseless. Kurt has a long track record of taking actions that, intentionally or not, have political undertones. Whether it’s recordings of council members like Vicki Dishon and Aaron Sharrock, or hearsay about figures like Kevin Myers, these controversies have framed him as someone who acts less out of principle and more out of strategy. To what extent this is true may be up for debate, but the pattern has eroded trust and made it difficult for people to view his work without skepticism.
Take last night’s suggestion to disable public comments during council meetings. His reasoning? That businesses might see those comments and decide against investing in Bucyrus. On the surface, it seems like a pragmatic concern. But it’s hard to ignore the irony: without the citizen activist version of Kurt Fankhauser — who once taped and shared council meetings online — public comments might not even exist in their current form. Now, as council president, he’s proposing to silence the same voices he once amplified.
Public comments are far from the top reasons why businesses hesitate to invest in Bucyrus. But you know what might be? A council president whose public actions frequently blur the lines between governance and political self-interest. The allegations he pushes on platforms like YouTube often distract from the legitimate issues he raises, like the budget. Worse, the way he disables comments on his own videos sends a message that he’s more interested in controlling the narrative than fostering true dialogue.
