Morton Trustee Election April 5th—candidates I’m voting for
Note: I originally intended to write about both the Village Trustee Election and the referendum to finance additional building in the Morton School District in the same post. I decided to separate the two and post each individually. Today, the Morton Village Election. Tomorrow, the Morton School District Referendum.
The Morton Trustee Election:
“Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:40 PM
To: Donald Vance
Subject: Re: Video gambling packet 3
I appreciate your communication, but if you cannot get your argument on one page (or two at most), you do not have an argument. I do not open large e-mail packets, and large U.S. mail packets go unopened into the trash.
Sorry,”
I received the above e-mail from one of the present members of the Morton Village Board. More on this e-mail later.
The election for members of the Morton Village Trustee Board is April 5th. There are four candidates running for election. Three of the four will be elected. This is the first election, since the election for mayor six years ago, that there are more candidates than positions available—a competitive election.
The four candidates in alphabetical order are:
1) Dan Acton—a new challenger
2) Randy J. Belsley—a new challenger
3) Anthony Huette—an incumbent
4) Stephen E. Newhouse—an incumbent
I have not seen a lot of information about the candidates and, as far as I know, there was only one public forum for the candidates. One of the problems I have observed since moving back is the absence of political competition. I have ideas of why that is true but this post is not to deal with that specific issue.
Since I moved back, there have been three controversial issues in which I have been involved. They are:
1) Selling beer and wine in grocery stores—specifically Kroger’s and Wal-Mart.
2) Prohibiting restaurants and taverns that sell alcohol by the drink at the location from having up to five video gambling machines.
3) Establishing a business district where the Village of Morton has eminent domain over approximately 99% of the businesses and between 1/3 and ½ of the land mass of the village.
When these issues were current, I posted extensively on them. Therefore, I will not go into detail on the three issues.
I opposed issues one and three. I supported issue two.
I do not know the positions of the two challengers. I do know how the two incumbents voted.
Trustee Huette voted:
1) To allow the two grocery stores to sell beer and wine.
2) To prevent video gambling machines within the community.
3) To establish a business district where the Trustees may confiscate up to almost ½ of the property within the village through eminent domain.
Trustee Newhouse voted:
1) To allow the two grocery stores to sell beer and wine.
2) Oops. Trustee Newhouse did not vote on this issue. He was the only Trustee who was absent for this vote.
3) To establish a business district where the Trustees may confiscate up to almost ½ of the property within the village through eminent domain.
Concerning Trustee Newhouse, it is also my impression that he very much wants to run for mayor when the current mayor retires. And no, I can not prove this to be true. I have years of political experience and it is the conclusion I have reached while dealing with the present village board. Again, it is my impression and not an established fact, to my knowledge.
Because of the votes of the present incumbents on issues of major importance to me, I will not support either of the two incumbents. I am supporting Dan Acton and Randy J. Belsley.
Oh yes, concerning the above quoted e-mail, which, once again, stated:
“Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:40 PM
To: Donald Vance
Subject: Re: Video gambling packet 3
I appreciate your communication, but if you cannot get your argument on one page (or two at most), you do not have an argument. I do not open large e-mail packets, and large U.S. mail packets go unopened into the trash.
Sorry,”
As background:
I have a master of science degree in political science and know something about the political process, elected government officials, and the operations of governments. I have also been an elected public official and have run for more than one political office.
As an elected public official, I would never tell a citizen that “If you cannot get your argument on one page (or two at most), you do not have an argument.” That’s utter and complete nonsense! If a citizen needs five minutes to talk to me or one to two pages of an e-mail or packet to communication with me, he gets it. If a citizen needs two hours to talk to me or one hundred pages of an e-mail or packet to communication with me, he gets it. I am his elected representative. His positions on the issues are important to me. What he has to say is important to me in reaching a valid decision on issues of the day. I may not agree with his arguments but it is my obligation and my responsibility as an elected public official to hear him out. I may not vote the way he wants me to vote but it is my obligation and my responsibility as an elected public official to hear him out.
That Mr. Newhouse is part of, an important part of, the democratic process. And yes, the above e-mail was sent by Stephen E. Newhouse.
Which leads to the following:
To me, it is the epitome of arrogance to declare that the length of a communication is the criterion for the determination of the value of that communication. To me, it is the epitome of contempt to declare to a citizen of this community that the length of a communication is the criterion for the determination of the value of that communication.
Mr. Newhouse, you are no longer a manger at Caterpillar demanding of a subordinate a summation of a problem. I am not your subordinate! The other citizens of this community are not your subordinates!
You are the public servant. I can tell you emphatically that it took me more time and effort to research and write the information presented than it would have taken you to read the material—it may have taken significantly longer to understand and grasp the material. Do you really believe that your time is more valuable than mine? Do you really believe that I used my valuable time to give you the privilege of not opening an e-mail or of throwing a mailed packet unopened into the trash? What arrogance! What contempt!
I do not know why Trustee Newhouse was not at the meeting when the vote was taken on the issue. I do know that in my four years as an elected public official I never missed a meeting of the board. Never! I do know that if Mr. Newhouse had been at that scheduled meeting I was going to address the board specifically about the e-mail he had sent to me and tell him the same things that I have just written. I do know that recently some cowardly Democratic Senators from Wisconsin fled the State to avoid voting on a bill that they knew would pass. And I wonder why Mr. Newhouse did not fulfill his responsibility and attend this important, scheduled board meeting.
Regardless, once I read the original e-mail, I knew that Mr. Newhouse would never receive my vote for any public office. In my opinion, Mr. Newhouse, you don’t deserve it!!! Sorry!
Note: I originally intended to write about both the Village Trustee Election and the referendum to finance additional building in the Morton School District in the same post. I decided to separate the two and post each individually. Today, the Morton Village Election. Tomorrow, the Morton School District Referendum.
The Morton Trustee Election:
“Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:40 PM
To: Donald Vance
Subject: Re: Video gambling packet 3
I appreciate your communication, but if you cannot get your argument on one page (or two at most), you do not have an argument. I do not open large e-mail packets, and large U.S. mail packets go unopened into the trash.
Sorry,”
I received the above e-mail from one of the present members of the Morton Village Board. More on this e-mail later.
The election for members of the Morton Village Trustee Board is April 5th. There are four candidates running for election. Three of the four will be elected. This is the first election, since the election for mayor six years ago, that there are more candidates than positions available—a competitive election.
The four candidates in alphabetical order are:
1) Dan Acton—a new challenger
2) Randy J. Belsley—a new challenger
3) Anthony Huette—an incumbent
4) Stephen E. Newhouse—an incumbent
I have not seen a lot of information about the candidates and, as far as I know, there was only one public forum for the candidates. One of the problems I have observed since moving back is the absence of political competition. I have ideas of why that is true but this post is not to deal with that specific issue.
Since I moved back, there have been three controversial issues in which I have been involved. They are:
1) Selling beer and wine in grocery stores—specifically Kroger’s and Wal-Mart.
2) Prohibiting restaurants and taverns that sell alcohol by the drink at the location from having up to five video gambling machines.
3) Establishing a business district where the Village of Morton has eminent domain over approximately 99% of the businesses and between 1/3 and ½ of the land mass of the village.
When these issues were current, I posted extensively on them. Therefore, I will not go into detail on the three issues.
I opposed issues one and three. I supported issue two.
I do not know the positions of the two challengers. I do know how the two incumbents voted.
Trustee Huette voted:
1) To allow the two grocery stores to sell beer and wine.
2) To prevent video gambling machines within the community.
3) To establish a business district where the Trustees may confiscate up to almost ½ of the property within the village through eminent domain.
Trustee Newhouse voted:
1) To allow the two grocery stores to sell beer and wine.
2) Oops. Trustee Newhouse did not vote on this issue. He was the only Trustee who was absent for this vote.
3) To establish a business district where the Trustees may confiscate up to almost ½ of the property within the village through eminent domain.
Concerning Trustee Newhouse, it is also my impression that he very much wants to run for mayor when the current mayor retires. And no, I can not prove this to be true. I have years of political experience and it is the conclusion I have reached while dealing with the present village board. Again, it is my impression and not an established fact, to my knowledge.
Because of the votes of the present incumbents on issues of major importance to me, I will not support either of the two incumbents. I am supporting Dan Acton and Randy J. Belsley.
Oh yes, concerning the above quoted e-mail, which, once again, stated:
“Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2009 3:40 PM
To: Donald Vance
Subject: Re: Video gambling packet 3
I appreciate your communication, but if you cannot get your argument on one page (or two at most), you do not have an argument. I do not open large e-mail packets, and large U.S. mail packets go unopened into the trash.
Sorry,”
As background:
I have a master of science degree in political science and know something about the political process, elected government officials, and the operations of governments. I have also been an elected public official and have run for more than one political office.
As an elected public official, I would never tell a citizen that “If you cannot get your argument on one page (or two at most), you do not have an argument.” That’s utter and complete nonsense! If a citizen needs five minutes to talk to me or one to two pages of an e-mail or packet to communication with me, he gets it. If a citizen needs two hours to talk to me or one hundred pages of an e-mail or packet to communication with me, he gets it. I am his elected representative. His positions on the issues are important to me. What he has to say is important to me in reaching a valid decision on issues of the day. I may not agree with his arguments but it is my obligation and my responsibility as an elected public official to hear him out. I may not vote the way he wants me to vote but it is my obligation and my responsibility as an elected public official to hear him out.
That Mr. Newhouse is part of, an important part of, the democratic process. And yes, the above e-mail was sent by Stephen E. Newhouse.
Which leads to the following:
To me, it is the epitome of arrogance to declare that the length of a communication is the criterion for the determination of the value of that communication. To me, it is the epitome of contempt to declare to a citizen of this community that the length of a communication is the criterion for the determination of the value of that communication.
Mr. Newhouse, you are no longer a manger at Caterpillar demanding of a subordinate a summation of a problem. I am not your subordinate! The other citizens of this community are not your subordinates!
You are the public servant. I can tell you emphatically that it took me more time and effort to research and write the information presented than it would have taken you to read the material—it may have taken significantly longer to understand and grasp the material. Do you really believe that your time is more valuable than mine? Do you really believe that I used my valuable time to give you the privilege of not opening an e-mail or of throwing a mailed packet unopened into the trash? What arrogance! What contempt!
I do not know why Trustee Newhouse was not at the meeting when the vote was taken on the issue. I do know that in my four years as an elected public official I never missed a meeting of the board. Never! I do know that if Mr. Newhouse had been at that scheduled meeting I was going to address the board specifically about the e-mail he had sent to me and tell him the same things that I have just written. I do know that recently some cowardly Democratic Senators from Wisconsin fled the State to avoid voting on a bill that they knew would pass. And I wonder why Mr. Newhouse did not fulfill his responsibility and attend this important, scheduled board meeting.
Regardless, once I read the original e-mail, I knew that Mr. Newhouse would never receive my vote for any public office. In my opinion, Mr. Newhouse, you don’t deserve it!!! Sorry!
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 5:10 AM
<< Home