---
One of the things that our friend Art kept driving home before he "retired from active blog posting" was that the 2010 elected members to the Oro Valley Town Council were financially supported by special interest groups. Our definition of that is any group that can seek financial gain from the decisions of Council.
The special interests to which we refer are those in the Land, Development and Construction industries; but there are others.
We have not wanted to be precipitous in our judgement of the influence of special interests on any council member; so we have, for the past 17 months, "steered-clear" of drawing or publishing any such judgement.
One way to assess "influence" is to review the political contributions
to the campaigns of the then mayoral or Council Members. So, we have (painstakingly) gathered this information for you to see. It is located on a new tab on or blog, near the top entitled: "2010 Campaign Contributions."
We want you to be the judge of whether or not special interests have an influence.
Here's something for you to do.
Take a currently-pending decision, such as the requested General Plan Amendment request for parcel 7-I. List the interested parties. Then, look at the information provided in the "2010 Campaign Contributions" tab. Did any individuals from any of the interested parties (Venture West, Vistoso Partners) make contributions to candidates? If so, which candidates? Ask: Is it possible the highly unusual Town Council action of delaying a decision on property 7-I have anything to do with this influence?
So, please, do a little homework.
You be the judge.
---
42 comments:
Dick.......While you can complain about having to work sooooooooooooo hard posting the contributions your time was completely wasted if you have no point. If you have an opinion, a point with something factual, SAY IT. It's easy to throw out accusations and make an attempt to discredit by innuendo. Evidently you cannot come up with any connection or you would have published it.
I challenge you to go to the same trouble and publish the contributions to the recall effort. Let's see who had a "special interest" in that idiotic, low class and horribly unsuccessful effort that cost the Town a few bucks that it didn't have to spend.
Thinker,
You're a member of the Oro Valley Optimist Club, yes? I find it interesting that you consistently fail to exhibit the principles that you are supposed to espouse as a member of that organization.
Here are just a few:
"To be so strong, that nothing disturbs your peace of mind."
Everything posted on this site seems to disturb your peace of mind.
"To look at the sunny side of everything and make your optimism come true."
Sunny side? You?
"To wear a cheerful countenance at all times..."
At all times...not just when someone agrees with you.
"To give so much time to the improvement of yourself, that you have no time to criticize others."
That last one needs no follow-up comment.
Don Cox (Objective Thinker?) Quote on the LOVE blog
“I challenge you (the Zeeman) to go to the same trouble and publish the contributions to the recall effort. Let's see who had a "special interest" in that idiotic, low class and horribly unsuccessful effort that cost the Town a few bucks that it didn't have to spend”.
John Musolf
I want to thank you for referring to me as an idiotic and low class individual for being the treasurer of the Oro Valley Recall effort. At least you did not use my name.
The recall effort was a sincere effort on my part to let some Town Council People know that they are not immune to criticism or consequences for making some questionable decisions (example: doubling the utility tax) that affect the income of Oro Valley Citizens. Evidently, you feel that anyone who uses their “constitutional rights” to free speech and challenges the government is a “bonehead”. I guess “little ole me” is also a “special interest” of gigantic proportions.
I would like you to identify specifically the dollars that the Town had to spend on the recall effort. I think you will find it was zero.
Don, again you have to use hyperbole (extravagant exaggeration) and innuendo in an attempt to make a point.
John....
I hope you had a great Thanksgiving also.
I think if you closely re-examine my posting there is no mention of individuals only the actual recall effort itself. I woul still use the same descriptors.
I made a previous posting on this blog several months ago clearly stating my support of people who wish to utilize the recall rights granted to them in state law. However, just because we have rights does not mean they should be abused.
People have a right to sue any other person if they so choose. However the abuse of that privilege led to penalties for filing frivilous suits. This was a frivilous recall and unfortunately there is no like recourse.
"I would like you to identify specifically the dollars that the Town had to spend on the recall effort. I think you will find it was zero."
There was Town staff time devoted to the recall effort. Am I to draw the conclusion from your posting that you believe that their time is worth nothing?
And just as an aside, should Mike Zinkin get elected to the Town Council (:-() when a fellow elected official votes for or against something he likes or dislikes is he going to spend another $200.00financially supporting a recall for that person also?
VC,
Perhaps, in forming his Optimist Club, OVOT forms his own self help group to help OVOT achieve those goals. Left to his own devices he cannot. Shrewd connection, Victorian Cowgirl!
OVOT,
Inference...inference...a highly developed reading skill Zee/Dick assumes you have in your bank of skills. He writes, in my opinion, anticipating bloggers have it. It's a compliment and yet you grow defensive.Hmmm?
AZ Moose,
Victorian Cowgirl reminded OVOT that his choicest name calling appears when he's unable to compete rationally. Of course, you are offended and I would be, too but focus on why he whips out the attack mode and bask in the backhanded compliment.
DV....
I hope you had a great Thanksgiving also.
You lose credibility in your first six words. I did not form an Optimist Club. I joined the existing one in 2002. It is a great civic organization that supports our local youth in many ways.
On multiple occasions you have stated that you think I am offensive. Now you say I am defensive. Pick one and stick to it.:-)
If I disagree with something that is irrational, does that make me rational? The recall was irrational. So much so that the folks behind it couldn't even gather sufficient signatures to get it on the ballot. What does that say about it?
Have a wonderful Christmas season.
OVOT,
Puzzling is the sarcasm in the the Optimists' Club's President's post, ie "I hope you had a great Thanksgiving, also." and "Have a wonderful Christmas season."
Facts=financial contributions and Council's votes/behavior. Perhaps, if the money was dropped in their PACs without reinforcement by their actions, you might have a point. However, Hiremath, Hornat, Snider and Waters voted for real estate and home developers interests and never made the effort to study, visit, interview or ask the affected residents what was their objection to the action at hand. Therefore, the inference has merit.
Do you remember when you wooed your wife? You brought her expensive gifts, courted her with moonlight, intersting people, the promise of your children, inducements for her to take your ring, not that of the other 9 lined up behind you for her hand.
So you prevailed and the others were toast. She married you.
Clear?
Thinker,
You call the recall "irrational" and "horribly unsuccessful." Yet, the recall forced the council to reconsider their decision on the fate of Coyote Run. Citizens voicing their concerns about CR at the meetings had no effect on the decision of those council members who voted to eliminate it, completely disregarding citizen input.
It was only AFTER they were informed that they were being recalled, that they suddenly had a change of heart and held another vote to reconsider it.
It was only AFTER they were informed that they were being recalled that they actually put the time in to research the issue properly.
If the recall was so "irrational" why did those council members start jumping through hoops the minute it was initiated?
If the recall was "horribly unsuccessful" why did it manage to overturn the Coyote Run decision?
Your definition of success is quite narrow.
DV....Why do you think there is any sarcasm in the Thanksgiving/Christmas comment? Is it not possible for you to simply accept a well wish when offered? And I am not the Optimist Club President. I don't know what your info source is but you are consistently wrong in some of your comments. I would consider doing some more fact-checking as the small errors really do make it difficult to take anything that is said on face value. That's just a suggestion.
"However, Hiremath, Hornat, Snider and Waters voted for real estate and home developers interests and never made the effort to study, visit, interview or ask the affected residents what was their objection to the action at hand. Therefore, the inference has merit."
After reading the above, some things jump out at me. I don't know how you would know if any effort was made. You may have not known of any effort but to take that and translate it to what you posted is a giant leap. Secondly I have no clue what votes you are referring to. Many times there is little relationship between developers and real estate interests if you are discussing the sale of homes. More often than not the realtionship between real estate sales people is with the home builder.
Lastly, I really got a kick out of your description of my courtship. My wife and I actually met in a hospital kitchen in St. Louis in 1968. I was living with my parents and she was living in a dorm that housed mostly student nurses. Neither of us had a pot to pee in or a window to throw it out so there were no expensive gifts. We communicated during her internship but never dated until she graduated and began working. Within months she relocated back to Louisiana and I took a job in Illinois. Our dating mainly was limited to a long weekend every two to three months in 1970/1 when I would hop on the southbound City of New Orleans train in Champaign, IL and travel overnight to New Orleans and then hop on a bus to Opelousas, LA. I would get to spend some time with her at her grandparents home and about 48 hours later make the return trip going directly from the train station in Illinois to work. It wasn't pretty but evidently effective. So in my case there was never any connection between material things and/or offers and the result. I also strongly suspect the same is true between LOCAL compaign contributions and results.
Thinker,
Well, you gotta love this. You say to Desert Voice...
"You are consistently wrong in some of your comments. I would consider doing some more fact-checking as the small errors really do make it difficult to take anything that is said on face value."
...yet you still respond to every post that DV makes.
And you no longer respond to any of my posts, claiming that they are not deserving of a response.
So from this, one can conclude:
(1) You WILL respond to posts that you believe contain information that is NOT factual.
(2) You will NOT respond to posts that contain comments that ARE factual.
Thank you for pointing out to me and to everyone else that my posts are accurate.
Seriously, guys - can you become any pettier please?
OVOT challenged the blog (and the author of the post) to actually come out and say what he wants to say instead of insinuating that something unsettling is going on.
The response from VC, DV, and John Musolf - consisting almost entirely of personal attacks directed toward OVOT - should make anyone wonder if there really is anything unsettling going on. Maybe nobody besides me looked at the actual numbers... It seems as if everybody has had their minds made up before this post anyways.
However, after looking at the numbers, I really don't see any validity in the "special interest" argument. It seems to me as if the candidates challenged here had received only a small fraction from so-called "special interests" - the vast majority of money came from regular guys/gals like you and me.
All in all, what I see going on here is a cheap attempt to discredit candidates based on no factual basis. Somehow, this reminds me of the recall effort. Here's to hoping it will have the same success.
OVOT,
You are correct. I did not check your position in the Optimist Club.
My apologies.
However, my source for saying certain Councilpersons did not visit sites to speak with the affected neighbors is the Councilpersons themselves. Solomon even apologized for not doing so for 7-i. He's also campaigning for Council. Politicians astutely court voters. Many begin their opinions with how they acquired their information and formed their positions. Gillaspie and Garner come to mind. By omitting this key piece of information, citing sources, they indicted themselves.
Hornat and Waters stated they were invited to tour HSL's new River Road project. They nor the 7-i residents stated that any Councilperson visited their subdivision. Is Council working for residents or developers? How can they make major decisions without firsthand information?
You asked how I know this. Observing them firsthand at Council meetings.
My! What sacrifices you made pursuing your wife. Your tale is delightful! You wooed her with the currency of courtship available to a young man beginning his career. At that age your feeling based sacrifice must have made a big impression on your wife. With few resources you saved for a train ticket, travelled a long distance to spend a short period of time and travel back to your job in IL. How ardently you pursued her! I'm impressed! Your dramatic actions proved your love for her. She said "yes" to you not the others.
"Courtship currency" is how you got her to agree.
"Currency" for business in politics where big bucks matter is different. Using what it takes to get the end result is what is used.
You are reading the post literally and it needs to be read figuratively.
VC,
Your point is well taken. OVOT seems to retreat when you wax most eloquently. Yes, the Recall added power to the CR issue. "Accountability" became real.
D. Voice; well said: "Yes, the Recall added power to the CR issue. "Accountability" became real."
And, I doubt the recall effort cost the Town much money. If the Town did spend some money, I would like to know how much and why.
DV and Nombe...Please explain to me how the recall had ANY effect on the CR issue. The plan was and is for RTA to run and pay for CR. And that will happen. The only thing that has changed is that RTA wasn't are ready to perform as they thought when the deal was supposed to be impelemented which caused the Town to reverse course and maintain it for another year. Hopefully this will be the last.
The limp recall movement was NEVER strong enough to have any effect on anything. To think otherwise is simply wishful thinking.
Nombe...In any recall movement there are administrative costs involved. I don't understand why that is so difficult to accept.
DV.....Ignoring selfserving, fact less, ravings of an individual that has zero credibility is not retreating. It is simply using my time for far better purposes.....like taking out the trash. That is after recovering from a laughing episode.
OVOT; Your question: "DV and Nombe...Please explain to me how the recall had ANY effect on the CR issue?"
Easy answer.
The recall gave notice that the people are, like the Harris Hawk, keeping an eye and are prepared to swoop down on the power elite.
Although my friend The Zee Man has taken over the postings on the blog, one thing has not changed.
cox still lives in his own world with his own sense of reality.
The best advice I can give to "Cowgirl," "Desert Voice," "Nombe," and others is to totally disregard him----as is the case with his preceding Guest View posting which has received zero comments.
Why Zee Man even gives cox this forum to espouse his views is another question, but that's Dick's decision at this point.
Bloggers,
Looking at this topic on from a national perspective, there is a curiously named website:
www.opensecrets.org
which tracks donations to national politicians' campaigns. Sponsored by the organization Center for Responsive Politics, it's mission is to 1) inform citizens about how money in politics affects their lives 2) empower voters and activists by providing unbiased information and 3) advocate for a transparent and responsive government.
Sounds like a terse description of what LOVE is all about, ie "Open Secrets".
DV -
slight difference. Zee Man picks the guys he doesn't like and shows their campaign contributions. That's partisan mud-slinging, not presenting unbiased information. I'd have much more respect if he dug up this information for all candidates back then so we can compare apples to apples.
In other news, nobody has made any effort to show/reason that these numbers show anything unsettling. I don't see it.
Local politicians on a ridiculously low salary are not the "power elite" - calling them elite is simply factually wrong. I challenge you to go talk to them and find out about their families. It seems to me as if these are regular citizens like you and I.
Also, none of this was "secret" - if I remember correctly, all of the candidates in question were the opposite of secretive about their endorsements.
This entire thing is ridiculous. You guys tried to make a big deal out of this in the last election cycle and it didn't work. You guys tried again for the recall and it didn't work. Now you guys are at it again...
I guess my question for you is:
At what point do you begin to believe that the reason your message is not getting through is because the citizens can see through your mud-slinging? Or, will you keep on thinking that your fellow citizens are blind/deaf/inattentive because they don't agree with you for forever?
---
"Zee Man picks the guys he doesn't like and shows their campaign contributions. That's partisan mud-slinging, not presenting unbiased information. I'd have much more respect if he dug up this information for all candidates back then so we can compare apples to apples" OV DAD
---
There is no reason to look at the election contributions of other candidates because these other candidates are not in a position of influence. They were not elected. They are not making the decision on 7-I.
---
art...I know Zeeman is very capable of answering your question but I'll give you my opinion as to why he allows others to post free of some of the past restrictions.
Unlike his predecessor, Zeeman recognizes that there are two sides to every issue. He also respects the opinion of others even when it differs from his own, again unlike his predecessor.
So have a great holiday season and watch out for those motor officers. I understand they are everywhere...:-)!!!!!
OV Dad,
Zeeman impreses as one who looks at politicians' values. Disagree with your perception that he doesn't like Hiremath, Hornat, Snider or Waters for personal reasons. In my opinion, Zee dislikes their voting record.
Why are these numbers unsettling?
Hiremath spent roughly five times what Zinkin did to get elected, much of that was his own money, but not all. A thinking person asks why. Many in OV do not have an extra $50k to give away in order to run for office. A thinking person wonders why someone would want that job so badly that he'd risk the loss. When Hiremath's contirbutors gave $6975. a thinking person wonders why and what those contributors want in return.
"...ridiculously low salaries..." If each candidate studied the issues and expectations of voters prior to the election, they knew money would not be their reward. If they thought they could juggle OV, job, wife and children and represent OV, they made a mistake. OV now requires the preparation of an urban community, a community of excellence. They were mistaken if they thought OV was a sleepy AZ town.
"...not secret..." Yes, you are correct. These are public facts. Publishing the facts at this time reminds voters of what other unseen forces are at work. As with Open Secrets it allows voters to draw their own conclusions.
"...ridiculous...at what point do you citizens see through your mudslinging..." Facts, just the facts, man! Zee is not name calling just publishing facts. An example for you to ponder...On the weekend prior to 11/16, Mayor Hiremath sent an email that was published on LOVE, stating that 7-I was not a done deal, that RV's HOA was curtailing the infestation of a very dangerous bug that had to be eliminated, and that property owners for 7-i were requesting a continuance.. On 11/16apolegetically Hiremath retracted each and every statement. In my opinion, that is ridiculous. He undid his own credibilty even before his contributors were listed.
Just had to drop in and respond to a comment by Desert Voice in regards to Brendan Burns. On November 13, DV said, "Agree with your take of Brendan. Top honors in rigorous institutions, married with family, a lawyer, a leader, his younger perspective will be a welcome addtion. Voters will discover how personable he is when they talk to him."
On December 2, DV said, "If they thought they could juggle OV, job, wife and children and represent OV, they made a mistake. OV now requires the preparation of an urban community, a community of excellence."
Which is it?
Hello Unknown,
Welcome to our blog.
We welcome all respectful comments.
Keep 'em coming.
Richard
Unknown,
Brendan's record shows that he not only accomplishes but excels. With youth on his side and a demonstrated track record, he's proven his energy is exceptional. Every once in awhile someone like that arrives on the scene.
Thanks for asking the question.
Unknown,
Brendan works for a firm. He is not self-employed with a million dollar practice, with employees to supervise and teach. Indeed, if that was his situation he impresses as a young man would select which area he wanted to focus on and not spread himself too thin. Brendan's major as an undergrad was government. Of all present and past Councilpersons, he alone has very specific academic
grounding for the position.
Desert Voice, It's just hard for me to understand how this can go both ways. Either a person has time to devote to an incredibly time consuming town government position or he doesn't. From his bio on the blog, Brendan has a wife, young children, and a full time job. I'm not sure where a council position would fit in his life, regardless of how much energy he has. Last I checked, there are still only 24 hours in a day! The fact that he is not the boss, but works for the firm, would lead me to believe that he can not just take time off whenever it's needed, to be an effective council person. A small business owner is much more flexible with his/her time and is more likely able to juggle this additional responsibility. That's just my opinion.
But based on your most recent comments, "If they thought they could juggle OV, job, wife and children and represent OV, they made a mistake," I think the addition of a town government position would be tough for someone as busy as Brendan to juggle who is not self-employed.
Unknown--- From my perspective, what's more important than having a job while serving on the town council, is having some common sense, concern for the constituents, and wanting what's best for the community.
A good example would be Bill Garner. Compared to the others on this present council, Bill is the most prepared, the most knowledgeable, and the ONLY one that stands up for his constituents on a consistent basis.
I would expect young Brendan Burns to do the same as Bill---who, by the way is a working man with a wife and two young daughters.
Unknown,
You commented that, "Brendan has a wife, young children, and a full time job. I'm not sure where a council position would fit in his life, regardless of how much energy he has." The same thing could be said of Mayor Hiremath who also has a wife, young children, and a full-time job. But his supporters (and it sounds like you may be one of them) never worried that he wouldn't have the time to devote to being Mayor.
You then stated that someone who is not self-employed (i.e. Brendan) cannot take time off when it's needed while a business owner (i.e. Hiremath) can be much more flexible with his/her time. (This is what leads me to believe that you are a Hiremath supporter.)
However, I disagree with your supposition. As an example, when I worked for doctors who owned their own practices, my hours were strictly 9-5. The doctors, however, still had more business to conduct after 5 PM such as meeting with their accountants and tax advisors. They also returned calls to their patients at the end of office hours. They also did their dictations then and completed numerous forms (e.g. disability forms, worker's comp, etc.)
They also took days off from their practices to attend medical conferences, to be guest speakers at medical functions, and to attend continuing medical education courses that were required in order to maintain their medical licenses.
This is just a small sample of the "extra" things that the physician/business owner was required to do. Meanwhile, the hourly and salaried staff were done at 5 PM.
Art, you seem to have missed my point. I was struck by the inconsistencies in DV's comments, which is why I chose to comment. On the one hand, he thinks it's a mistake for someone to have a full-time job, a wife, a young family, and be able to serve adequately as a town government official. On the other, he likes Brendan, who is a very busy man, with a full-time job and a young family. This didn't make sense to me, so I pointed it out. I also have to disagree with you about Garner...I don't think he is, "...the most prepared, the most knowledgeable, and the ONLY one that stands up for his constituents on a consistent basis." Actually, I have found him to ask questions during council meetings that he should easily have been able to research on his own, outside of a council meeting. As an observer, this makes me think he does not do his homework. In my opinion, and we will just agree to disagree, he is definitely NOT someone who I feel stands up for his constituents on a consistent basis.
VC, you can not compare your hours and schedule as an employee of a doctor's office to a full-time attorney's hours, such as Brendan. Personally, I don't know of any attorneys who are done with their work day at 5 p.m. on a regular basis. Actually, a friend once interviewed for an attorney position, wanted to work 40 hours per week, and the interviewer asked, "So, you want to work part-time?"
Unknown--- I will tell you that you misconstrue Bill's point of asking questions----as you put it--"that he should have easily been able to research himself."
Bill is quite intelligent; is in fact the most prepared of any of the others, and he asks these types of questions in order to have the respondent be on record.
I'm well aware of Bill's motives, and totally endorse his manner. Too bad you, and perhaps a few others, don't understand the intricacies of his ways.
Unknown,
Here's another example. I once worked in a 3-doctor practice. Two of the doctors were co-owners of the practice. THEY OWNED the practice. The 3rd doctor was someone they hired and paid a salary to. The salaried doctor finished his day on an average of 2 hours before the physician-owners of the practice did.
He saw the same number of patients that they did, completed the same amount of forms, made the same amount of phone calls, etc. However, he was not involved in the "running of the business" aspect of things.
I have a friend who owns a hair salon and I can describe the same scenario. The hair stylists who rent stations from her just come in and see their clients and then leave. But the owner is also involved in accounting, payroll, ordering supplies, bill paying, and meeting with state officials who license and inspect hair salons, etc.
Artmarth: 1) I disagree with your assessment of Garner. I have seen him lack information at council meetings that in my opinion, has nothing to do with his desire to get his point on the record. This is your opinion of his actions and I have my opinion. 2) The Zee Man welcomed me to the blog and said, "We welcome all respectful comments." I don't see that your comment to me, "Too bad you, and perhaps a few others, don't understand the intricacies of his ways," is in a respectful tone. There is definitely a contradiction here between the suggested requirements of the blog and your response to me.
VC: None of the examples you continue to describe to me negate the fact that most attorneys work well beyond 40 hours per week and typically are not able to leave work at 5 p.m. on a regular basis. Burns may be different, but he would be unusual. You could tell me that you're friends with Mark Zuckerberg, and that he only spends a few hours a day at the Facebook office. Your friends and their work requirements was not my point.
I participated in this blog because I saw an incredible discrepancy between Desert Voice's insistence that Burns would be perfect to represent the town and his comment that, "If they thought they could juggle OV, job, wife and children and represent OV, they made a mistake." There is a HUGE disconnect here. DV's comments sounded like politican-speak to me...contradictory!
This conversation is going in a circle, so no need to continue....
Unknown:
"Welcome to the Machine."
--P. Floyd
Unknown,
US News and World Reports 2011 ranking of Notre Dame U is #19 nationally with Ivy League schools leading the pack. Georgetown U, a longtime leader of Catholic Universities is in the low 20s. NDU beat GU!Last year NDU accepted 28% of applicants, making it very competitive.
Burns was not only accepted but graduated magna cum laude. He excelled in an extremely competitive program. He graduated Law School with honors. Tune in to his unusual abilities to balance his life.
Young, his education is recent. Fresh from his programs he will learn rapidly and knows how to organize under pressure.Youth learn faster, a scientifically proven fact. TOV is fortunate to have him apply.
Only you feel the disconnect. I see him as an exception. You are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.
Besides diligent oldtimers like Gillaspie and Garner, there are other new Councilmembers who do not have fulltime jobs, may do unpaid volunteeer work, whose children are grown, who do not study and review issues like Garner and Gillaspie. With more time availabe to them, why have they not taken the initiative, their due diligence?
Desert Voice, You sound like you might be Brendan Burn's campaign manager. Honestly, the only reason I started this post was to point out the disconnect in your comments. He may be very well educated. I am sure he is also a very busy man. You said, "If they thought they could juggle OV, job, wife and children and represent OV, they made a mistake." I did not say that...nor do I necessarily think it! You said it!
Maybe because you support Burns, you don't think your philosophy applies to him...
I stated before that this conversation is going in circles and I hadn't planned to respond again. Now I'm done. :)
Unknown,
A cliche...in 2010 the handwriting was on the wall. OV developed very quickly from a small town where coyotes were seen croosing Magee during daylight hours in '90s to a thriving, highly desired suburban Tucson community within a mere 20 years.
The issues before Council required deeper research, dedication. Because the newbies on Council seemed to have missed that aspect during the campaign and that their pay would not equal the input needed, I have strong feelings. Latas, donated $17,000 worth of a free study to the Council. She was only one of six council members and she freely did that. Garner continues to do that. Gillaspie comes knowledgeably informed as always but newbies ignore their wealth of background information because they seem unaware that it matters. Latas, Garner, Gillaspie freely "gave" quality time to OV. That same quality does not exist in the new Council.
Yes, I respect Hiremath's donation to the children's room at the library because getting little minds to love reading is key to the future.
But the obliviousness of the new Council to apply their energy to research and comprehension of issues is mindboggling and blocks greater growth in OV.
Therefore, I strongly support, a young lawyer who values education as a way to make informed decisions. Burns' accomplishments show he will use those skills for OV"s advancement. He has a sterling track record.
Unknown,
You said, "Your friends and their work requirements was not my point."
I am aware of this. Your point was that business owners have more free time than the people who work for them. Your exact words were...
"Either a person has time to devote to an incredibly time consuming town government position or he doesn't."
"The fact that he is not the boss, but works for the firm, would lead me to believe that he can not just take time off whenever it's needed, to be an effective council person."
"A small business owner is much more flexible with his/her time and is more likely able to juggle this additional responsibility."
Yes, a small business owner will have MORE FLEXIBILITY in WHEN they do things, but they still have to DO MORE THINGS each week than the employees who work for them, which was MY counter-point.
Also, when Mike Zinkin ran for Mayor, one of his "pros" was that he was retired and worked only part-time which would give him plenty of time to devote to the job of being Mayor. Interestingly, this spare time was seen as a negative by his detractors who actually attacked him for it!
Now suddenly HAVING THE TIME to devote to the job of being a council member is seen as being a positive.
Since you keep talking about hypocrisy, just thought I'd bring that up.
Hello Unknown. As the “Zeeman” said: Welcome to the LOVE Blog.
I post a lot of guest views to the LOVE blog. My handle is “arizonamoose” but I sign all my emails or comments with my name, John Musolf.
Some people feel that the Zeeman only posts certain guest views and comments from people he likes. In my opinion, I think he wants to hear from anyone with the time to do a little research and present factual information.
Keep submitting! You will see in most of my postings I try to present documented evidence to support a position. When I can’t I try to identify that the information is “In my opinion”. Sometimes Objective Thinker (Don Cox) and I have a spirited tennis match with a mix of facts and opinions.
Some people feel I am a gadfly!
A gadfly is a person who upsets the status quo by posing upsetting or novel questions, or just being an irritant. The term has been used to describe many politicians and social commentators.
In modern and local politics, gadfly is a term used to describe someone who persistently challenges people in positions of power, the status quo or a popular position.
In my opinion, I am an activist! However, the definition of a gadfly fits me as well!
Yes, many times people will post a comment that challenges your comment. I agree sometimes that it goes on & on. However, we are all guaranteed that speech in a free society. Everybody has different views on a subject. Usually I try to limit my original posting and comment to one since continual discussion will keep on like a tireless tennis match.
John Musolf
AZ Moose....
One of your finest postings....in my opinion.:-)
Now for my very best advice.....Please move on from Burger King to In and Out. It is a far better product, a little more out of pocket, but IN MY OPINION, well worth it. In fact I'll buy lunchWednesday if you want to go.
Don
Thinker
Yes, I have been to In & Out Burger about 8 times. Great food. I still have a tooth for a double bacon cheeseburger at Burger King once in a while (clog my arteries).
John Musolf
Personally...
I like the filet-O-fish at McD's once a month or so, though I haven't had one in quite some time.
Are we off subject or what?
But then again.... sometimes its good to just have fun...
Richard
Zee.....After 35+ comments I think the subject has been pretty well vetted. Maybe a survey for the best 3 fast food places in Town!!!
Post a Comment