| Author |
Message |
    
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 4743
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 2:57 pm: | 
|
and I'm sure you can read steel's follow up response. |
fmertz
Citizen
Username: Fmertz
Post Number: 114
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 3:00 pm: |
|
Somehow I don't think Kathleen is a good spokesperson for anyone's campaign but hey, birds of a feather flock together. |
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 523
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 3:10 pm: |
|
Sorry, Steel and Greenetree. I was typing nad missed your posts.
Steel,
I don't think I can make myself any plainer on this issue. Yes, I "begrudge" Ken the use of the Town Hall parking lot as a place to park his car when he goes to Manhattan for his reasons that have nothing to do with town business. You say it breaks "no rules" but the Town Hall parking lot has not got a lot of spaces. Those few spaces are there so busy people don't have to keep driving around the block to find a parking space when they want to go into Town Hall. You and I may not be the busiest people in town, but some people are quite busy. Just as busy as Ken.
And I think that is a fairly large presumption that the difference between Ken and other commuters is that at the end of the day they go home to some selfish pursuit. How about the people who race back to Maplewood to attend TC meetings? PTA meetings? School board meetings? This is not an appealing campaign message.
Is there some reason Ken can't park someplace else near the train station? Is there some reason he can't drive to Town Hall from there? It would take all of 2 minutes and it would leave space free ALL day at Town Hall.
As for the comments on integrity, I'll refer you to my other remarks on that subject, and my remarks on surveillance cameras. But thanks for the comments on my verbal acumen! I seem to be rather spelling challenged today.
Greenetree,
I agree about the far more important issues being about the kids and getting real programs for them. Nancy and Lester addressed that as best they could in the 2-minute time frame of the debates, but why not ask Lester with an e-mail or a phone call?
|
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 524
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 3:12 pm: |
|
I'm not a spokesperson for anybody's campaign. If you read my other post, my remarks about this are quite spontaneous, and have mainly been in response to my very negative feelings about surveillance cameras -- which suddenly a lot of people seem to share. Let's hope they continue to recognize the problems when the cameras are pointed at them. |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 7534
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 5:21 pm: |
|
I agree with the above poster(s) who wrote to the effect that if this is the best/worst (depending on your perspective) Nancy and Lester could come up with as a reason for why voters should vote for them, their campaign is in serious trouble.
Does anyone know if there is permit parking on Park Road? I don't believe there is and Ken's car in the photo is shown at the extreme Park Road end of the lot so what is the problem? There is plenty of free (non-permit) parking that distance from the train station.
Jem:
I agree with Duncan about the quality of the filming of the debate. I had the volume on my TV turned up to the maximum and I still had trouble hearing some of the candidates' responses. Plus, it would have been nice if the person filming had shown who in the audience was asking each of the questions during the final portion of the program, especially since I couldn't hear their names (assuming they had been given). |
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 530
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 6:00 pm: |
|
Joan,
I spoke to Ken on the phone today. He called me. He didn't give the excuses other people seem so eager to give for him.
I'm going to say once again that I didn't like the mailer, but maybe if we took this out of the realm of "Ken" and just substituted "TC member" things might get a little clearer for some people.
It's a good idea to give TC members parking permits that enable them to park in all of the town's Municipal parking lots as long as they like. If a TC member has a morning meeting at Town Hall, and then has to run to catch a train for Manhattan right after, I and everybody thinks it is A-OK for them to leave their car parked all day in the Town Hall parking lot, since we want to faciliate their doing town business.
If a TC member doesn't have a morning meeting and they need to commute to Manhattan by train that day, why are they parking all day in the Town Hall parking lot?
If the answer is: "I'm too busy to do what other ordinary people do and I deserve more than you pay me!" I think that is not an acceptable answer. Ken did NOT give that answer to me today.
If the answer is: "It is too damned difficult to find a parking spot near the train without getting up at dawn or walking forever to get to the train and the jitney is too inconvenient!" I think that is not an acceptalbe answer. A TC member is there to work to solve the parking and jitney problems, which may not happen if they never actually experience them and just let other people suffer them. Again, Ken did NOT give that answer to me today.
If the answer is: "I suppose I could find a spot in the morning where other commuters are made to park, but then I would have to drive my car four or five blocks to Town Hall when I get back" -- I don't find that an acceptable answer either. Ken did NOT say that to me today.
Ken's answer was: "I am a municipal employee and I have a parking permit that allows me to park in any lot at any time." When I told him that he had been given this parking permit to facilitate his doing town business, not to get to his job, he told me that was my interpretation and my opinion only.
I don't think so.
Ken is candidate for public office. It's not unfair to ask an incumbent candidate why they don't park elsewhere on days he doesn't have morning meetings at Town Hall, and the answer could very well determine whether or not one wants him or her back in office. If it's because there aren't enough commuter parking spaces or the jitney service is inadequate, I'd like to know what that incumbent candidate is doing to correct that for others. If the candidate isn't aware plenty of people in Maplewood are just as busy and even busier than he is, and that's why we have representative government, that's important. If the candidate thinks because he or she volunteered to serve the town that he or she is entitled to greater parking privileges in a very parking-stressed town, even when not needing the parking for town business, one might want to weigh that.
And like I said before, to me the reason people are so upset by this is because a surveillance camera makes somebody's actions look illegal before they've had a chance to explain or because you don't see the whole picture. They shouldn't be used for investigations. I hope Ken -- and everybody -- now has a clearer picture of the problem with surveillance cameras.
|
Larry Seltzer
Citizen
Username: Elvis
Post Number: 13
Registered: 4-2006
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 6:09 pm: |
|
Joan - yes, there is permit parking on Park Road. |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 7536
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 7:04 pm: |
|
Thanks, Larry. Still, if the TC members have permits to park all day in town lots, then it doesn't sound as if there was any wrong doing here. |
Monster©
Supporter
Username: Monster
Post Number: 3446
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 7:15 pm: |
|
It's not necessarily that there was is anything wrong with it, it's just that the other people that want to get elected want you to think that, and I would bet that they would do the same thing if they got elected, who wouldn't? |
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 6247
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 7:30 pm: |
|
Considering Ken doesn't get paid for all his good work he deserves it.
That flyer was absurd, however it was great marketing for Ken and Kathy.
Negative advertising rarely works and this is a classic case. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2737
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 7:42 pm: |
|
I have no problem with Ken Pettis parking at Town Hall. I do have a problem with his calling Kathleen to discuss it. I consider that a serious error in judgment. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2738
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 7:44 pm: |
|
mem: Unfortunately negative advertising usually works pretty well. |
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 533
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 9:00 pm: |
|
I have a proposal:
If there is really no problem for commuters to leave cars parked in the Town Hall lot all day while they're working in Manhattan, why not also let train commuters with paid permits park there too, on a first-come-first-serve basis?
That would make everybody happy and solve some of the problems commuters presently have. I'll be surprised, however, if anybody proposes it at the next TC meeting.
But it wouldn't surprise me to learn that a majority of people buying homes in Maplewood are commuters into Manhattan. The cost of the jitney service and what routes it services, the number of parking permits and parking slots available, and the high taxes people who live in "walk to train" neighborhoods get socked with are actually a rather large slice of life here and profoundly affect people's property values. I'll bet the daily commute dominates the lives of a LOT of families, all the way from how much time they can shave off the commute to be at home with their kids to whether they need to buy a second car, etc.
Parking and bulk pick up. I can't remember a campaign when they weren't part of the discussion. I'd prefer to discuss parking than surveillance cameras. Why do we have them again? Fred Profeta just sent me a letter saying crime has been going DOWN for the past 3 years. (I do think it is an error in Fred's judgment to keep sending me these letters, especially after he calls townwide emergency "public safety" meetings to scare the heck out of everybody about rising crime.)
|
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 5043
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 9:17 pm: |
|
question: how dumb does an issue have to be before it gets discussed at length here? 54 posts (as of this one) on something that can theoretically affect a grand total of five parking spots. Theoretically, but in reality the one guy in a week who has to park on Park or Oakland and therefore walk fifty yards further to Town Hall.
There's only 29 posts about an entire parking deck; only 36 posts about millions of dollars in overruns for the police station. For that much money we can all get free limo service to the station.
Get a clue. There are important issues out there, please quit diddling around with this sideshow and focus on something that matters to more than one hypothetical person. |
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 535
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 2, 2006 - 9:27 pm: |
|
I'm with you on the cost overruns on the police station for sure --- and they won't have enough parking at their new location! Who is responsible for that? |
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 6249
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 12:30 am: |
|
Anon,
I have benn in advertising for over 20 years with many industries, I also have a masters degree in it. Negative advertising is rarely successful except to make people remember not to buy, use or endorse the product.
Again, this is a classic example. Plus Kathleen is campaigning for them. You can't get much more negative than that. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 11707
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 5:11 am: |
|
Kathleen, actually Vic and his buddies. They led the charge to keep the station from being built at the Bette White site. They found a sympathetic person in Ms. White. This is fine. However, Bette White is now in the process of closing as the owner is planning on retiring.
This is a wonderful example of the local Dems fighting among themselves for whatever advantage they can get instead of looking out for the best interests of the Town and its citizens. |
MpwdNJ
Citizen
Username: Mpwdnj
Post Number: 2
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 11:17 am: |
|
I saw Mr. Lewis-Powder in town today and confronted him about the parking flyer. I told him I was embarrassed as a democrat that he stooped to negative campaigning. I told him that for the hundreds of hours that Ken works for the town, I thought it was fine that he parked at Town Hall.
He told me that since I had made up my mind he wasn't going to 'waste' his time on me and that is was clear I already knew whom I would vote for.
That spoke volumes. If that is how he his going to try to handle issues with people who don't agree with him, to simply to dismiss them, then he certainly has no place in town government. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2739
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 12:02 pm: |
|
Mem: I bow to your advertising expertise. However I was discussing negative advertising in the political context. You say that Negative advertising is rarely successful except to make people remember not to buy, use or endorse the product. Wouldn't that mean that negative advertising against a candidate would lead to people not voting for the candidate? Hasn't negative advertising worked in many recent elections?
|
mem
Citizen
Username: Mem
Post Number: 6253
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 2:29 pm: |
|
anon,
I honestly don't know about negative tactics in politics. But I received that ridulous flyer and I thought it was rather sad, and my reaction is not to vote for the originators. I met Nancy once and she seemed nice so that was confusing.
I guess she's part of that desperate, nasty element we all know and laugh at?
Anyway, Ken has my vote, he's a wonderful TC member.
|
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2741
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 3:49 pm: |
|
Mem: I was thinking of things like the "swift-boat" attacks on Kerry.
Anyway,having now seen the flyer about Ken and the parking space I agree that it is incredibly tacky and frankly just plain dumb. If I ever get a chance I may ask Nancy about it.
I think what sometimes happens is that in the heat of a political campaign people lose perspective. They actually begin to believe their own BS, that their opponents are actually "evil" or that their election will mean "the end of civilization as we know it". |
Lydia
Supporter
Username: Lydial
Post Number: 1917
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 7:22 pm: |
|
Anon.
Quote:They actually begin to believe their own BS, that their opponents are actually "evil" or that their election will mean "the end of civilization as we know it"
Well said.
Most people don't live and breath politics. The tenor of the last few elections has been so rabid that the voters are just disgusted.
This is a contested election so I thought I'd see tons of lawn signs, letters to the N/R and activity on MOL - but it's been pretty quiet.
Voters are wiped out and don't want to get pulled into anymore pissing matches.
Most people in Maplewood have a lot of friends from a variety of circles - PTA, volunteer committees, scouts, sports, etc.
Everyone has their own political choice, but it's gotten to the point where siding with one group or the other can compromise friendship - no one wants to make that trade-off.
A while back I posted that the Corzine endorsement for K & K was from years ago - since then, I've been chastised on and off-line for my error (The mayor, 1 candidate, several campaign workers) - and I was wrong, K & K heard from Corzine that he supported them - and I believe he said that.
The folly is that the campaign committee didn't wait for a written endorsement.
Corzine is a politician, not your political friend unless you win.
The endorsements that local voters look for are from friends and neighbors. If you turn off the real power (local voters) you get what we have today - a bunch of disgusted voters who will probably stay home or take one from column A and C.
|
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5474
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 7:40 pm: |
|
Quote:The tenor of the last few elections has been so rabid that the voters are just disgusted.
Agreed.
How did this happen? Any thoughts? |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 7553
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 8:50 pm: |
|
It happened because certain people became more interested in personal political power and/or in pushing a personal agenda than they did in what is best for the Town as a whole. We need to focus more on doing whatever we can to unite the Town not drive it further apart. Hopefully, we can find a way to make this happen.
What too many people don't realize is that it is in everybody's best interest to make every block in every neighborhood in town one of the best places to live in the United States. Voting for the two TC candidates on Tuesday whom you feel will come closest to making this a reality is a good next step. |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2547
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 9:09 pm: |
|
Joan, have you ever seen this type of atmosphere, i.e., "more interested in personal political power and/or in pushing a personal agenda" prior to the last few years. If so, are you prepared to put the blame on people of Fred's camp or Vic's camp. I know where I put it. I have emails to prove it. But I'll be the first to go up to Len or Nancy or Celia (the campaign manager) and tell them that the Ken Parking Mailer was stupid, negative and hurtful to them.
Joan, are you prepared to look at the "democratic" district leaders running on Ken and Kathy's line and not recognize a few people who ran as or supported local Republican candidates.
When you've done that analysis, perhaps we'll talk.
Wendy Lauter |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2744
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 9:58 pm: |
|
Mem, NoHero, Joan, Wendy:
As far as I can see there are no ideological or philosophical differences so it tends to become a question of personalities and egos. Still, once the voting is done whoever is elected usually tries to do the best job he or she can so when voting perhaps each of us should ignore the campaign nonsense and just try to vote for the candidates we think most qualified. |
Jonathan Ben-Asher
Citizen
Username: Jonathanba
Post Number: 114
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 10:01 pm: |
|
I am writing as someone who is barely familiar with any of the candidates. (I do think David and Vic have done an excellent job on the Committee.)
I was amazed to get the flyer about Ken Pettis' parking. Is this the issue that the voters should be thinking about in deciding who to support? Do we need this level of acrimony in an election?
I was also disturbed to read the flyers attacking Pettis and Leventhal for not keeping taxes low enough, as they had promised. Now, it wasn't good for them to run on that issue several years ago, and it's not good for their challengers to run on it now. I don't think any serious candidate can come up with a list of services should be eliminated which would result in a significant tax cut. And, as we know, most of our taxes our out of our control, between what's required by the Board of Ed and what we have to tax to make up for because of our State's antiquated governance.
Some of the previous posters have referred to quests for political power. I think we are kidding ourselves about how significant all of this is. We want to elect people who will work hard, think seriously and creatively, and be honest in their dealings. Ultimately, these are not issues of ideology, they are issues of admnistration. The rancor of the last few campaigns is far in excess of what is at stake. |
sac
Supporter
Username: Sac
Post Number: 3471
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 10:14 pm: |
|
I am saddened that our BOE and TC elections have come to the point where they are. Honestly, I think that all of the candidates sincerely want to do the best for the people in our community, although they may have different ideas on how to do that. And, once they are elected and get to work, they surely realize that most issues are not as simple as the campaign soundbites.
Unfortunately, it has become so politicized that we have to endure all of this nastiness (not to mention all the money that has to be spent) in order to get through the elections.
I wish we could find a better way to staff what are essentially volunteer positions serving the community while maintaining (or regaining?) an open and democratic process for doing so? |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2549
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 10:24 pm: |
|
Politics and egos go together like love and marriage. Personally, I'm looking for the smallest ego with the largest work ethic. It's not just Ken and Kathy vs. Nancy and Lester. Look beyond that and look at the district leaders. Anon, if you see a district leader who ran as a Republican candidate, wouldn't you call that an ideological difference?
Wendy Lauter
a democrat who voted for Bob Grasmere and probably would vote for John McCain but does not tolerate hypocrisy. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6450
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 11:34 pm: |
|
I heard an extremely disturbing story today about one of the opponents launching into a profanity laced diatribe within earshot of a six year old. Dropping the F bomb frequently. That does not do much to make me feel comfortable with the way that person would act under what ever pressures (and I am certain there are many) the TC faces each week.
|
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15099
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, June 3, 2006 - 11:41 pm: |
|
It's on both sides equally. |
Joan
Supporter
Username: Joancrystal
Post Number: 7559
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 8:38 am: |
|
Wendy:
I'm prepared to put the blame on each of us who finds it necessary to view the candidates in terms of "camps" rather than capabilities. We should be looking for the best individuals to serve on the TC period.
|
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 537
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
|
Joan,
In a primary election, the candidates themselves are asking voters to elect them to a camp. You can hardly blame any voter in Maplewood for crying "foul" when they discover some political operatives are pretending to be Democrats when they are in fact active Republicans, and so abusing the trust of innocent voters and the local elections. If one has a principled objection to partisan politics -- and one can -- don't vote in a Democratic primary. But don't wag a finger at people within that party trying to preserve the integrity of the party they have a right to join, even here. And need I point out that the "best individuals" to serve Maplewood wouldn't include people who lie straight out of the starting gate to voters about who they are and what they stand for? Period. Unfortunately in Maplewood in recent years it suddenly became necessary for voters to have to peel back the labeling on candidates to find out if they have even the barest minimum of honesty in how they present themselves to the public.
To all reading,
What I really popped back in here to say is that re-reading my own remarks in this thread I really regret that I repeated on MOL what I said to Ken -- that it was an "abuse of privelege" for him to park at Town Hall while at work in Manhattan. That language, out of the context of our back and forth on the telephone, is excessively pejorative and implied Ken was doing something which I am certain he is not. And I also think there's not much point in Ken taking a commuter slot if he can legally park elsewhere out of the way. So I hope Ken (and others) will accept my apology, and I will reiterate that I thought the ad was ill-conceived and crude, in case that wasn't plain to anybody in my previous posts.
|
Fruitcake
Citizen
Username: Fruitcake
Post Number: 300
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 12:06 pm: |
|
An apology from Kathleen! I think I'll step outside and look for the flying pigs. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 6451
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 12:14 pm: |
|
Kathleen, it takes a really big person to apologize like that. Well done. I am really impressed. |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2747
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 2:02 pm: |
|
Kathleen: For what it's worth, I also am impressed.
Wendy: I didn't know anything about the former Republican TC candidate running for Democratic District Leader until I ran into another MOLer this morning who told me about it. I do not know why this woman changed Parties and got active in the Democratic Party. She may be one of many former Republicans who are so disgusted with GWB that they have switched Parties, or she may be an opportunist. I may have met her once but I don't know her or her beliefs so I cannot judge.
However, I was told that the Dem Party Leadership asked the present DL to step down and make way for this new candidate. If that is true an explanation should be forthcoming, at least to the Democratic voters of the District in question, which I believe is District 1. |
kathleen
Citizen
Username: Symbolic
Post Number: 540
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 2:13 pm: |
|
Anon and Duncan,
That's quite nice of you to say so, so thank you. It is definitely worth something. |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2552
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 6:17 pm: |
|
Hi Anon,
Not sure what you meant in your last paragraph. Just so you and all reading this know, I actually met the person running in District 1 and really liked her (it was at a MOL F2F). This is not personal. This is about wondering why this person and plenty of other district democratic leaders are not the most active in the Democratic Party. For those who know me, it's not news that I'm good friends with Marie Stratechuk, a Republican who I have many political arguments with. Can anyone imagine Marie switching gears and running as a Democratic District Leader? I think not. For that, I argue with her; for that I respect her. Perhaps the person running did have a change of party; in that case, I welcome her into the fold of the Democratic Party. I would like to know more. I really would.
For those who know me, I'm also good friends with Annette DePalma, one of the most capable people I know who is running for District Leader in my district, 19. There is no reason why Annette should not have been appointed to fill the slot left empty when a district leader left our district. Instead the "powers that be" (notice the quotes) felt it was justified to appoint a very nice person who has done so much less than Annette for our town it isn't funny. Politics/ego/poker/power play.
I remain a committed Democrat living in District 19 and urge all to vote their true conscience not their alignment with Fred and others on Tuesday.
Wendy Lauter |
anon
Supporter
Username: Anon
Post Number: 2754
Registered: 6-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 8:22 pm: |
|
Wendy: The person who told me about the former GOP candidate for TC running for Dem DL in District 1 told me that the current female DL was asked by the Town Dem Chair to step down in favor of this new candidate. I have no idea whether this is accurate or not. |
GSP142
Citizen
Username: Gsp142
Post Number: 125
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 9:12 pm: |
|
Anon, I was very reluctant to post here (I pl'd you), but I am the current female District Leader, a lifelong Democrat, and I was not asked to step down. I discovered, on my own, that I had been replaced. I am still on the ballot, running my own campaign.
Please respond to my PL if you would like more information. Thanks. |
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15105
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:10 pm: |
|
Did you ever receive an explanation as to why you were replaced?
|
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15106
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:13 pm: |
|
Politics/ego/poker/power play
is on both sides. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5486
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:16 pm: |
|
Mr. S - Are you actually asking why a lifelong Democrat was tossed aside, by the supporters of Mr. Pettis and Ms. Leventhal, in favor of a former Republican candidate for the Township Committee?
Cannot you figure that out for yourself? |
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15107
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:20 pm: |
|
Um, yes I am asking.
|
crabby
Citizen
Username: Crabbyappleton
Post Number: 638
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:23 pm: |
|
there are good district leaders, and then there are district leaders who just are. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5487
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:23 pm: |
|
Quote:Um, yes I am asking.
Fair enough.
But, you do know the answer, yes? |
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15108
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:29 pm: |
|
How could I possibly know the answer? Only the person receiving the phone call from the MDC has the official answer. Hence my question.
|
GSP142
Citizen
Username: Gsp142
Post Number: 126
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:31 pm: |
|
Yes, sbenois. It had nothing to do with my performance as District Leader, but instead due to the continuing tensions among the Democrats in Maplewood, call them "factions" or whatever. Again, I do not want to go into detail here (pl me if you like), but I will say that I find the situation unfortunate, as most of the folks who volunteer their time to become politically involved do because they care about their community (as I do), and think they have skills, experience or knowledge to contribute to its well-being. It's my guess that there are at least a few folks who have watched the course of the recent primary campaigns, and are discouraged from political participation because of what they see going on. Especially unfortunate because with everything going on, not just locally, we need the active engagement of concerned citizens, but maybe for some, the political price to be paid would not seem worth it.
I have done my best to work cordially and professionally with everyone that I've worked with as District Leader, and hope that I am able to continue to serve my neighbors in this capacity. |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5488
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:36 pm: |
|
Good answer. |
GSP142
Citizen
Username: Gsp142
Post Number: 127
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:39 pm: |
|
Thanks, Nohero. |
Wendy
Supporter
Username: Wendy
Post Number: 2553
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:42 pm: |
|
Quote:Politics/ego/poker/power play
is on both sides.
Never said or implied it wasn't. Not sure why you needed to. |
sbenois
Supporter
Username: Sbenois
Post Number: 15110
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, June 4, 2006 - 10:52 pm: |
|
It just happened to be time for the daily checkpoint meeting. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page