Mary Souza’s Newsletter 
NIC Trustee Mic Armon, who is running for re-election, showed up last Thursday for his first time at the Republican Women’s lunch meeting. When he was given 2 minutes to speak, he tried to assure the audience that he really is a Republican, and then he added a very awkward statement: Mic told the crowd, as he gestured to where I was sitting, “I was Mary Souza’s next door neighbor for many years.”
While it is true that we were neighbors and we can have a cordial conversation about our kids, I do not support Mic’s election. Mic’s comment seemed opportunistic; a way for him to use me to influence people in the room. He must be worried.
Please know that I have not and will not support Mic’s re-election because I do not like many of the decisions he has made on the Board. When NIC was considering the purchase of the $10 million dollar land near the sewage treatment plant, I asked Mic why they didn’t take the purchase to the voters in a Bond election. He responded, “We’ve been told it wouldn’t pass.” And so the voters were bypassed once again. He also supported taking Foregone Taxes and, even worse, embedding them in the budget’s bottom line so the taxpayers would have to pay more year after year after year.
I am supporting Todd Banducci, who is running against Mic, and I want to remind all of you, dear readers, to vote tomorrow for 3 new, honest, responsible people for the NIC Board: Vote to elect Todd Banducci, Paul Matthews and Ron Nilson.
You can re-read my Oct. 3rd newsletter about the NIC elections here.
Please also remember to vote YES, YES, YES on Proposition 1, 2 and 3, the Luna education reforms. The National Teacher’s Union has dropped over $3 million dollars in Idaho, trying to defeat these laws that will put some basic limits on the power of the union. We care about education. These laws will help Idaho kids improve their ability to compete in the workforce of the future.
You can re-read my Oct. 24th newsletter about it here.
And don’t underestimate the importance of stopping some big power players from adding a filter between the Commissioners and the voters by hiring a County Manager and taking away our right to vote for County Clerk, Assessor, Treasurer and Coroner. Please vote No on the “Optional Commission-Manager Form of County Government Ballot Measure.”
You can re-read last week’s newsletter on that issue here.
So, dear readers, please make sure you, your family, friends and neighbors get out to vote. I’m nervous about the Presidential election tomorrow and hope we can celebrate a great Romney-Ryan victory tomorrow evening. But for now, all we can do is vote and pray.
Best to you all,
Mary
A little bit ago, the Coeur d’Alene Press published this article http://www.cdapress.com/news/local_news/article_e50d1094-2794-11e2-984a-001a4bcf887a.html
I think rationaldiscussionplz’s comment just about says it all. Liberals are busy trying to rewrite history and cover up the fact that they’ve been endorsing “non-partisan” candidates for years and just don’t like it when other people point out that fact.
Comment by Adonis — November 5, 2012 @ 4:12 pm
The NIC Board of Trustees’ duplicity with the public extends past its decision to not take the land purchase to a vote of the people as required by the Idaho Constitution.
The Trustees’ reasoning was that they were not buying the property. No, they were leasing it. All the money they paid was rent, and after the last payment was made, the Foundation would turn over ownership to NIC. One of the problems with habitual deception is that it becomes harder and harder to keep your stories consistent. The NIC Trustees voted to prepay almost all the rent payments in one lump-sum final payment well before the term of the “lease” had expired. But under the terms of the “Lease” agreement, NIC became immediate owner with that last payment of “rent.” The result was that in its haste to buy the property from the Foundation, NIC paid rent on land it already owned. How much rent did NIC overpay? The title of my June 2011 post says it all: $6,720,029.87. That’s how much prepaid rent on land it already owned the NIC Board of “Trustees” should have recovered from the Foundation.
Comment by Bill — November 5, 2012 @ 4:53 pm
Adonis, welcome to OpenCdA. I agree that it’s time to stop the game of non-partisan, because party affiliation helps the voters understand whether the candidate agrees with them philosophically and that can be helpful. But the bottom line on many of these quiet boards and commissions is that the public doesn’t know or follow what the officials do, so they don’t know their record.
That’s what is especially challenging about the Mic Armon re-election. He says he’s Republican, but he hasn’t been acting like one. He’s voted for major tax increases WITHOUT voter approval, and had the public pay much more than the land was worth because the questionable appraisal was seriously out-of-date and the real estate market had tanked before the college made the deal to pay full price for the property. So sometimes the partisan labels have to be looked at carefully.
Comment by mary — November 5, 2012 @ 5:44 pm
You’re absolutely right, Mary. I keep up with local politics, but I know plenty of people who don’t. I realized a couple of years ago how necessary endorsements are, because I waited until election day to tell my friends on Facebook about the 2010 Democrat endorsement of Ken Howard and Christie Wood. I had a bunch of comments from people who had voted for those candidates absentee or earlier in the day who would have changed their vote if they had that information before I posted it. Others had left that part of their ballots blank, because they didn’t have enough information. It’s critical to get this kind of information out to voters.
I don’t care one bit that the Democrats made endorsements–it’s good to know where candidates’ loyalties are. I care about the hypocrisy the Democrats display when they’ve been endorsing “non-partisan” candidates for years, and then suddenly come out the day before the election with big innocent Bambi eyes and say “oh, we’d NEVER endorse in a non-partisan election.” It’s sickens me.
Comment by Adonis — November 5, 2012 @ 6:44 pm
In some peoples’ hands (or on campaign posters), party affiliation is nothing more than a tool of expedience. If it’s expedient to claim Republican affiliation, they’ll claim it. If it’s expedient to claim Democrat affiliation, they’ll claim it. For some, party affiliation is a means to an end, not a philosophical or ideological orientation. It is nothing more than a way to dupe people into filling in an oval by his or her name on a ballot.
It should not surprise the political parties that more and more people are claiming no partisan affiliation at all. Many have seen the duplicity in all political parties and those people in them who use party affiliation as a tool of manipulation. How many candidates have been elected to public office by people who were clueless about the candidate but seduced by his or her party affiliation and blind endorsement by kindred partisans?
Comment by Bill — November 5, 2012 @ 7:50 pm
Bill,
I somewhat agree-although I liken the “parties” to tribes. At one time in history tribes got along, there was enough to go around and we did not need an affiliation to act as a “tool” as you put it. At one time, the whole was considered greater than its parts, and it didn’t take political tools to wrench on the weaknesses of others.
Tools have only one use–to multiply strength, but political strength, (along with political power and force) should not be confused with authority. Authority is not a tool per se, and that leads to why so many are trying to avoid party affiliation–in acknowledgement that they are done being used as “tools” to someone else’s end-game (or means to an end).
Would it be so novel that we didn’t have party affiliations; no Democrats, no Republicans, Whigs or the like. Maybe something could get done in Congress, maybe.
Comment by old dog — November 5, 2012 @ 9:00 pm
Heh, over at Huckleberries everyone’s “favorite” wannabe councilguy Adam Graves claims that any screenshots showing the Democrats’ endorsements must be Photoshopped. Liberals: why own up to your actions when you can just rewrite history?
Comment by Adonis — November 5, 2012 @ 9:13 pm
old dog is 100% correct. They should be fighting for the good of ALL citizens, NOT the party. The right will never help the left and visa verse unless the party personally has something to gain and D@MNED be the citizens that elected them. We’ve all witnessed it right here in CdA. As long as those elected or their select friends can benefit no one else matters.
Comment by concerned citizen — November 6, 2012 @ 6:09 am
The problem is that the public asks. They want to know.
When I ran in 2009, I was specific to anyone who asked, “It’s a non-partisan race.” That did not satisfy the voter. In 2011, I was clear, “I’m a Republican.” That satisfied the voter.
You cannot deny that 150 years of two-party political training hasn’t had an effect. If you want to play the game and win, you must pick a side and wear their jersey. That’s American politics.
Comment by Dan — November 6, 2012 @ 9:42 am
You’re right Dan.
That’s why there are so many liberals on the Kootenai County Republican Central Committee. They choose to wear gear embroidered with an elephant.
Comment by Ancientemplar — November 6, 2012 @ 9:52 am
I think you’re too broad, CC, saying the left or right only help if there’s something for the party to gain. I think that, especially here in our community, the questionable officials & power players are of both parties, but they are only interested in lining their own pockets or the pockets of their cronies…citizens be d@amned, as you said. It’s the politics of greed.
Comment by mary — November 6, 2012 @ 10:37 am