It’s Our Town Too
Mary Souza’s Newsletter
Wednesday morning we woke to awful weather and by 9:30, when we got down to City Hall, the snow was falling fast and the wind was whipping. It was cold! I didn’t expect many folks would brave the elements, but I was wrong. There was already a crowd when I arrived and they kept coming. Signs, smiles and determined spirits. A sense of camaraderie and the courage to take a stand for the right to vote. Just over 100 people turned out and stayed for an hour. I was so impressed!
The Press article the next day was demeaning. They called it a “dud”. They underplayed the turnout and said “about 75”, even though the Press reporter told me at the rally that he counted 100. They twisted the info and tried to make the Recall group look disorganized. But we will not be dismayed. We will move forward and keep our eyes on the prize, which is our VOTE.
The entire Recall effort is focused on gathering enough signatures to place Mayor Sandi Bloem and Council members Mike Kennedy, Deanna Goodlander and Woody McEvers on the ballot in November. Then every registered voter in the city of CdA can VOTE. They can vote to either keep these officials or to remove them from office. The voters will decide.
What’s wrong with giving the people a VOTE? Apparently it scares these officials and their supporters. They would not allow us a non-binding advisory vote before they approved the $40 Million dollar McEuen Park Master Plan on May 24th. So the people of CdA responded at the ballot box last November by electing two new and one returning councilman who were in favor of a public vote on the McEuen Plan. Every candidate who was against a public vote lost the election. By large numbers.
So once again, at the first meeting after the new councilmen were sworn in in January, the issue of a public advisory vote on McEuen was on the agenda. Again, Mayor Bloem, Kennedy, Goodlander and McEvers voted NO PUBLIC VOTE.
Now, after all the asking, begging, big crowds with signs, pleading and cajoling, we are finally taking action. We are following the state laws that give us the RIGHT to recall our elected officials. Idaho requires no reason for recall, but we have so many reasons we could never fit them in the 200 word section allowed on the petition form, so we kept our first attempt very general. The city fussed and we decided it wasn’t worth a big legal fight right now, so we wrote in just a few of the many reasons people are dissatisfied with the current leadership.
You all know there’s so much more…the arrogance, the disrespect, the “we know better” attitude. And that continues still. Did you see in this morning’s CdA Press, where Sara Meyer, who is a big supporter of the Mayor and is the daughter-in-law of Steve Meyer who, along with Charlie Nipp, owns the whole 1/2 block across from McEuen, says “We are not going to let these people take over our town.” These people? Her town?
Mayor Bloem and Co. would not let WE, the people, have an advisory vote, but now Susie Meyer says it’s her town?
Also in the Press article today, Mayor Bloem laments what might happen if the Recall is successful, she said, “You’re throwing out the entire vision for what we have for the future.” Just whose vision is it Sandi? Your vision and that of the select downtown business owners? It is Pita Pit owner Jack Riggs’ daughter, Jennifer Riggs Drake and her husband, who both work in management for Pita Pit Headquarters down on Sherman Ave, who organized the ANTI-recall rally along with Sara Meyer. Why do these people want to keep the public from a VOTE? Why do they think their vision of CdA means more than ours?
This Recall effort is not partisan. The Recall has many supporters from all political viewpoints. I know the Press and City Hall are trying to make this a Republican against the Democrat thing, but they are totally wrong. This is about the people’s right to VOTE, and that crosses all political lines.
Please remember, dear Readers, that you will not get the straight story from the Press, during this recall effort. And I caution you about the internet blogs. They are not our target market and they are not our concern. The prize that we are working for is getting enough signatures to put all four officials on the ballot in November. Then we, the people, will all have our VOTE.
The Recall CdA Headquarters will have its opening day tomorrow! Please stop by to see the office and sign the Recall petitions. We will be open from 10am – 7pm tomorrow. Our usual hours will be 10-2 and 4-7 everyday except Sunday. The Headquarters is located at 296 W. Sunset Ave., Ste 21, CdA
(in Sunset Village off of Hwy 95 near Las Chavelas restaurant)
Phone: 704-1596 Web site: www.recallcda.com
Hope you can stop by tomorrow. Have a Happy Easter weekend! –Mary
*******************************
PS: You can also come to the Tea Party Patriots of North Idaho’s CANDIDATE FORUM this next Wednesday, April 11, 2012, at the Stateline Events Center. It will be a chance for everyone to question the candidates for Sheriff, County Commissioner, State Legislature and more. Doors open at 5:00 pm and the program starts at 6pm. 26 candidates will be there. After a quick introduction, there will be “speed dating” 15 min. increments where you can question the candidates in from your area in small groups and then move on if you wish. It’s all free. Recall CdA will have a booth too and you can sign the petitions (if you are a registered CdA voter) or sign up to help on the Recall if you live outside the city. Hope to see you there! –Mary
***************************
Mary Souza is a 24 year resident of CdA, local small business owner and former P&Z Commissioner. Her opinions are her own. To sign up for the free weekly newsletter, or access a free archive of past columns, visit www.marysouzacda.com Comments can be sent to marysouzacda@gmail.com. Please visit the local issues web site www.OpenCdA.com for more discussion.
Ah yes, the ol’ Botanical garden. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander… unless you might get goosed……And Duane was paying for that one!
Comment by Ancientemplar — April 9, 2012 @ 12:57 pm
“Just like the “What ever will we do with the land we purchased at Cherry Hill?”
That defines the real issue cc, trust. The Mayor and her Head Nodding buddies have lost the trust of the public. They want to make this about something else, really ANYTHING else, but the fact is they lied too many times and now no one trusts them.
Just my opinion. Just.
Comment by justinian — April 9, 2012 @ 1:01 pm
The potential Hagadone advisory vote would have been in regards to transferring public land into private hands. McEuen is already public land and is not transferring into private hands. That’s the main difference and why the mayor was wanting an advisory vote for the Hagadone plan. Anyway, an advisory vote in any case is not binding (regardless of the outcome the city could and likely would forge ahead) and would have cost the taxpayer, as will the recall vote if it comes to pass. Thought y’all didn’t like additional, unneeded taxpayer expenses.
And the 1999 advisory vote (which I couldn’t Google up much info on) has exactly what to do with the 2012 recall attempt? Anyway, I don’t seem to recall anyone getting worked up enough about a much needed community center back then to attempt a misguided recall of our fairly elected city council and mayor.
The recall seems like an attempt to invalidate and override the will of the voting public who fairly and squarely elected these folks into office. Some of us are quite angry about that fact. Why should your personal distaste for these city officials trump my legitimate vote?
Comment by Patrick Jacobs — April 9, 2012 @ 1:06 pm
“Why should your personal distaste for these city officials trump my legitimate vote?”
What an odd, topsey-turvey point of view. Your vote elected whomever you voted for. In the last election voters sent a compelling message that the incumbents ignored. Now you can vote again, either in favor of their recall, or not. How does that do anything to your vote? And why would you be angry about a chance to vote again?
Comment by justinian — April 9, 2012 @ 1:17 pm
Patrick, for the sake of argument, lets say $14 million is all that remains of the plan. With schools begging for enough money to repair buildings that border on unsafe, with families trying to balance food and gas to go to work (to pay for gas and food), with unemployment rampant, foreclosures turning people out of their homes and on and on etc., do you really think that amount of money should be spent on a park for tourists? And please, it isn’t for the locals. It snows here, of what use is a park under the snow to the locals. Locals use the boat launch and the ball fields, not in the winter however.
I don’t trust Mike Kennedy, however I find the idea of him being worth a vendetta highly amusing. He is too insignificant to warrant a vendetta. Where in the world did you get that idea.
All this being said, I applaud you for returning and posting a thought out commentary.
Comment by rochereau — April 9, 2012 @ 1:18 pm
So should the city just figure out a way to cut every CdA resident a check for $317? (That’s $14 mil divided by the population of our town). Who decides who is needy and who isn’t? Is it even legally possible to take money raised by the LCDC and from the state parks commission and re-purpose it for an entirely different scenario such as schools, unemployment aid, or gas money? If the mayor and three three council members are recalled are Gookin, Adams, Edinger and whoever else gets plugged in there going to figure out a way to make it happen? Would the average CdA resident rather get a refund check for $317 (most of whom don’t live in the URD anyway and didn’t contribute anything to that money in the first place)or would they rather see more green space and improved amenities at one of our city/states most tragically underused plots of land? Seriously, is any of it actually doable? Somehow I doubt it.
Comment by Patrick Jacobs — April 9, 2012 @ 1:38 pm
Patrick,
We, the community, has not heard a motion from our Mayor and Council to adopt a revised Master Plan for McEuen Field. The Master Plan remains unchanged.
For the current budget year 2011/2012, they have budgeted for the items to Phase 1. A phase is a stage in a process of change or development, meaning more stages are to follow. You are aware the City is in negotiations for a new boat launch on Cda. Lake Dr. When negotiations and trades are complete, the boat launch at 3rd St. will disappear, most likely part of Phase 2. The same thing will happen with the ball fields. Once the boat launch and ball fields are gone, than the City will find funding for additional phase in their goal to complete the Master Plan adopted earlier this year.
Did you attend any public meetings regarding McEuen Field? If you did, you would know that those meetings were run by professionals to get the desired outcome. Why did the City’s survey not match up with the other survey complete by those two ladies who wants to protect McEuen Field activities that our community has enjoyed over the years. Two surveys and two different outcomes. I wonder why?
The community was loud and clear with their message when they voted out the same old “head bobbers” regarding McEuen Field. It will happen again in 2013.
Yes, your are right the “subject has stirred up a lot of passions and emotions on both sides”. Thank you for agreeing the subject is McEuen Field and not any vendetta against the 2009 elections.
Comment by LTR — April 9, 2012 @ 1:47 pm
Patrick, I’m also concerned that my legitimate votes have been minimized. Since you brought this subject up, I will weigh in. The legal maneuvering undertaken by the city to make certain that Mike Kennedy remained seated as a city councilman will forever taint the decisions of this council. None of the recall activity is specifically directed at Mike Kennedy or to the $69,660 paid to his legal team by the taxpayers of Coeur d’Alene. The fact this man in office while his legal team continue to delay getting this important matter heard by the Idaho Supreme Court is not mentioned as a reason for the recall effort. From what I ascertain the election case was all about not having illegal votes trump legitimate ones and overriding the will of the voting public. As a matter of disclosure, I did support Mr. Adams, Mr. Gookin and yes, Mr. Brannon in 2009. The way that the city handled this election matter did a lot to destroy any remaining trust of our local government. Those heading up the recall seem to be focused on their legal right to be heard. So please, no poor Mike stories. Sign the recall petition or don’t sign it, but don’t make this out to be about anything other than the citizen’s right to be heard. After all, Mr Brannon has been waiting for two and a half years.
Comment by doubleseetripleeye — April 9, 2012 @ 1:53 pm
Hey Just (may I call you Just?) Didn’t see you get any answers. My guess, there are no good answers. Some votes are better than others maybe?
Ya see, my guess is Her Sandiness and the three head-bobbers KNOW that an advisory vote means they lose. They lose all those juicy contracts that filter through all their “inside connection” special deals. They lose all their incestuous little friendships that their city jobs buy them.
They are also petrified that they will lose the recall vote. Just look at the flaming, screaming hissy fits their supporters are throwing! If they really had the confidence of the community, they’d say “bring it on!”
They tremble at the idea of actually facing an honest vote. As they should.
Comment by Pariah — April 9, 2012 @ 4:38 pm
Those were rhetorical questions Parry. Looking at that posters brief history here I didn’t expect much more than we’ve seen. A lot of “feelings”, a lot of “anger” and not much substance.
Just my opinion. Just.
Comment by justinian — April 9, 2012 @ 4:43 pm
Hey Patty – how about this question, why is Tony Berns worth ten thousand dollars a month? Why doesn’t that offend you?
Comment by Pariah — April 9, 2012 @ 4:53 pm
Hey Parry, I never said that didn’t offend me. This is about the recall effort, which is what truly offends me. There are surely better ways to address the matter of overpaid civic employees than the undertaking of a recall effort, which is divisive and costly in and of itself.
Comment by Patrick Jacobs — April 9, 2012 @ 5:06 pm
Really? Name them, if you can. And then explain why the number of six figure paid civil servants is so high in the City by the Lake? As for divisive, the failed election before this one was divisive, and run poorly. That election and the wasted fights caused by the incompetent former County Clerk are the proximate cause of this divisive climate.
Comment by Pariah — April 9, 2012 @ 5:14 pm
Patrick
I am pleased that you are willing to have open dialog with us. I cannot say as much for the mayor and three opposing members of the city council. Yes we are a representative government. But that is for the “ordinary and necessary”, I may have the wording wrong but, I think you get my drift. This is a park. A park that had very little wrong with it until dougy let it go to $H#*. On whose orders? It is not blight in the sense of the term as UR is concerned. I know many that are of the in crowd that used to play tennis daily downtown. I, for one, use McEuen daily and love how simple it is. As far as winter time. It has been brought up many times that the current ball field can be use as an ice arena with very little cost to the taxpayer. The lights are in, the bleachers, concession, etc. You do not need to complicate something so simple when the answer is staring you right in the face. IMO, the good ole boys won’t profit from such a simple solution. If one REALLY wants to help the local economy, they will have to look far beyond what they personally will get off of the deal.
Thank you for being here.
Comment by concerned citizen — April 9, 2012 @ 5:33 pm
I am still waiting. To recap, we saw:
An after midnight drunken attack.
Two days later an angry, and possibly sober screed.
Then sort of an apology and then pathos, bathos and more attacks.
I am just not seeing the give and take that most rational people would call a “dialogue”.
Comment by Pariah — April 9, 2012 @ 5:41 pm
I dont see the recall as costly. Its
not a special election. We have one scheduled
Comment by Ancientemplar — April 9, 2012 @ 5:44 pm
OK AC, we can take “costly” off the table, but Patty is right, it is divisive. But wait, aren’t ALL elections “divisive”? Isn’t that the purpose?
Comment by Pariah — April 9, 2012 @ 6:04 pm
(most of whom don’t live in the URD anyway and didn’t contribute anything to that money in the first place)
Really…Ya know what I am tired of, grossly inaccurate statements given by individuals who believe they know all. The URD’s affect every property tax paying citizen in this city. Become knowledgeable with “mil rates” and you will soon understand how Urban Renewal Agencies affect tax rates. When the URD’s close, there will be a windfall of increment flowing into the city’s Coffers and the mil rate should decrease, however, with the Agency intact, the mil rates are increased.
Comment by lexacon — April 9, 2012 @ 8:27 pm
Patrick, you wrote “Mary Souza, you are truly despicable. We are fed up with your lies and nonsense and we aren’t going to take this fight laying down.
But you haven’t answered my questions, Patrick. Why not? What are the lies and the nonsense that make me “truly despicable”? Again, please be specific.
I will also caution you that your free pass for personal attacks is now done. Adjust your rhetoric or you will be edited. You’ll be fine if you keep your comments to the topic.
Comment by mary — April 9, 2012 @ 9:02 pm
Oh, I see, Mary. Someone supposedly attacks you and they will be edited but personal attacks against him or me are not only tolerated but allowed to proliferate. Even though this is your blog, don’t you think that is just a little hyprocritical?
Comment by John Austin — April 9, 2012 @ 10:00 pm
John, has anyone here called you despicable and said all you do is lie? If they do disagree with you, or think you don’t tell the straight truth, do they say why; do they cite reasons? Do they answer if you ask them why they think what you said was untrue? This new commenter, Patrick, has not backed up any of his attacks, that’s why I’m warning him.
It’s one thing to disagree with someone, even vehemently, but it’s another thing to call names without any specific reasons.
Comment by mary — April 9, 2012 @ 10:19 pm
I’ll agree that was harsh, Mary, but where do you draw the line. Civil discourse must have its boundaries if we are to gain anything from each other. I hope you will continue to strive to make this a safe sounding board for those of us with differing opinions.
Comment by John Austin — April 9, 2012 @ 10:23 pm
Mary, like I posted earlier on this thread, I’m not denying that I was harsh. Mean, to put it more succinctly. I regret that now, but I was feeling overly emotional about this whole recall situation, and I’ve never been one to mince words. Unfortunately, sometimes I have to eat them. Mea culpa. I should have expressed my point of view in a way that wasn’t quite so inflammatory, and that’s basically what I’ve been attempting to do in my subsequent posts. And Pariah, I raise my pint of ale to you. Cheers.
That said, whether you’re aware of it or not. There are a lot of people in this town that have a real problem, perceived or real, with the way you present your point of view. According to you, everyone you talk to is continually “shocked” by the anti-city information you lay out in your newsletters, but you never provide any verifiable sources to your “I was told by” or “city insider” sources. That combined with a layer cake of campy outrage and conspiracy, your aim seems to be to get people all fired up about things that have no tangible basis in fact. Your style can sometimes come off rather like high camp. Don’t get me wrong. I like drama queens sometimes, but often your accusatory tone and continuous urge to stir the pot makes it hard to take you completely seriously.
You’ve accused pretty much everyone involved with the LCDC, city council, police department, and whatever else of all kinds of terrible things, but you do it in a very passive-aggressive way and then claim deer-in-the-headlights innocence when you’re called out on it. You and many of the folks who comment here have said some pretty rude, crude, and baseless things about both friends and relatives of mine, people who have devoted years of their lives working toward doing the jobs they were elected to do and making our town a better place to live. Not everyone’s lives revolve around obsessing over property tax increases – many people are willing to pony up toward the greater good.
I do apologize again for my out of line first comment on this post, but it was a culmination of emotion directed toward someone who I perceive as promoting ideas that I feel are quite misguided and very wrong. I have hesitated to post here in the past, but have been watching this site for a while and the recall issue finally sent me over the edge. Your recall plan is perfectly legal of course, and I wouldn’t begrudge you the right to carry onward with it, but it’s something I believe is outrageously extreme and unnecessary and many people other than myself perceive something more personal here than meets the eye. We’re merely basing that notion on your long history of negativity and outrage that frequently seems to fall outside of the realm of verifiable reality.
It’s guaranteed that we will never agree on this issue (and many others), but ultimately I am hoping to see this nightmare recall situation resolve itself in a way that is least disruptive to the future of this hometown of mine which I was born and raised in (40 years tomorrow!). Like many others my age and beyond who have made the choice to stay in or come back to our hometown, we want to continue to see it progress forward and shine, and we are threatened to the point of nasty outbursts by the idea of it rolling backwards in time.
Comment by Patrick Jacobs — April 10, 2012 @ 1:22 am
Talk about passive-aggressive posting, hey Patty put down that pint!
Ignoring the immature emotionalism that permeates your alcohol scented post, here is the rub:
You miss the point. When an UN-ELECTED clique of “inside connection” cronies get to take millions of dollars away from the elected representatives and spend them absent oversight or control by the public, that gets old. When they deny the public any meaningful voice, that gets the normal, average person angry. When they waste huge amounts of money trying to hoodwink the public and run head-nodding has-beens, they lose. And when they lose and their diminished remnant smugly and arrogantly jams their corrupt deal down the throats of the newly elected representatives, well, they get a recall vote.
If your little buddies had the courage of their convictions they’d campaign on their record. Instead they are using the old, tired politics of intimidation to try and silence those that want open and honest government. They delete and block people from commenting, they organize to intimidate businesses that would gather signatures and they threaten illegal acts to void out the process. Those are verifiable, public facts about the folks you identify with.
Be proud man, your drunken and emotional ramblings are preserved here for all to see, as is your odd defense of those who cheer illegal acts, who silence those who dare ask honest question and who try to intimidate those who, for the common good, are simply exercising their rights to petition government and vote. Stand tall, you are part of the crumbling, former elite of North Idaho politics. Never give up, go down with the ship, proudly representing what was the “Inside Connection” crowd of “pretty People”.
Comment by Pariah — April 10, 2012 @ 6:11 am
Lexa gets it right:
Comment by Pariah — April 10, 2012 @ 6:22 am
Let us all remember too to wish Patty a “Happy Birthday”!
Comment by Pariah — April 10, 2012 @ 6:48 am
Let us not forget the taxpayers in the county also have to pay for UR BUT they do not get to vote in CdA elections.
Comment by concerned citizen — April 10, 2012 @ 7:01 am
Patrick, thank you for the apology. I’m far too busy with the Recall signature drive to spend much time answering your diatribe on my style and how some folks don’t like it. It’s fine by me if they don’t, and if they don’t agree. I never use personal attacks and I never lie or fabricate any information.
That said, I asked you to provide specifics to back up your accusation that I am full of lies. Again you did not. Here’s what you wrote:
You are welcome to go to my archive website, http://www.marysouzacda.com, and use the search field at the top to look up any topic or person’s name that I’ve ever written about. Then let me know what specific lies you think I have written.
You also wrote:
That’s not true. I give sources if I’m quoting official information, or quotes from news sources, but you are correct in that I never quote people who give me confidential information. I keep their identities protected, if they wish, because the backlash of intimidation from this city administration is very real. It’s a big reason we have to get these people out.
Comment by mary — April 10, 2012 @ 7:20 am
“It’s a big reason we have to get these people out.”
The long reign of intimidation, criminal behavior, unethical land deals and sweat-heart contracts will soon end.
Just my opinion. Just.
Comment by justinian — April 10, 2012 @ 7:31 am
Patrick, you are related to former Kootenai County Clerk, Dan English is that correct?
Comment by doubleseetripleeye — April 10, 2012 @ 8:02 am
It doesn’t matter who is related to whom. That has no relevence to opinions. Heaven knows, I would loathe being judged because of some of my relatives.
Patrick, happy birthday. My 40th was the only one that depressed me.
I don’t agree with Patrick, however give and take is informative. It is a good thing to have opposing opinions.
Comment by rochereau — April 10, 2012 @ 8:22 am
Rochereau, I agree it doesn’t matter to whom you are related. Patrick brought this subject up. If indeed he is related to Dan English, that might help explain his disdain for this site. I do think that we can have a civil conversation with opposing viewpoints, but that a frame of reference is helpful.
Comment by doubleseetripleeye — April 10, 2012 @ 8:40 am
“Like many others my age and beyond who have made the choice to stay in or come back to our hometown, we want to continue to see it progress forward and shine, and we are threatened to the point of nasty outbursts by the idea of it rolling backwards in time.”
What a telling sentence. The free exercise of rights threatens people. What a fascinating perspective on life in the River City.
Just my thoughts. Just.
Comment by justinian — April 10, 2012 @ 9:00 am
“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
George Washington
Comment by LTR — April 10, 2012 @ 11:29 am
“Like many others my age and beyond who have made the choice to stay in or come back to our hometown, we want to continue to see it progress forward and shine, and we are threatened to the point of nasty outbursts by the idea of it rolling backwards in time.”
Patrick, what made you stay or come back? Please don’t misunderstand that question. I’m sure you had reasons that made you want to stay here or come back here whichever applies. Can you not understand that people who were not born and raised here and may not have ever lived here before did not decide to come here so they could change it into someplace else? Do you truly believe that people who moved here from Los Angeles or Seattle came here to change Coeur d’Alene into either of those? No, it was the Mayor and the leftovers on City Council who decided to bring in an architect from Seattle to Seattle-ize Coeur d’Alene.
You used the phrase “rolling backwards in time” to describe what others would call preserving and honoring the community’s history and heritage. You used that phrase along with “progress forward and shine” as if Coeur d’Alene cannot both preserve its heritage and progress. I had the good fortune to live for nine years in Alexandria, Virginia. The west end of Alexandria, where I lived, was nicknamed “condo canyon” because of the apartments and condos lining the Shirley Highway canyon. But it was also a thriving city of business and industry that attracts thousands of people annually to historic Old Town Alexandria.
More locally, it is not the Recall CdA people who will force the Museum of North Idaho to relocate or close down completely. Here’s an idea: Instead of moving the Museum to the City sewer plant or forcing the Museum to close, why not get the Chamber of Commerce and LCDC to donate the building they’re in to house the Museum. Then the Chamber and LCDC can move alongside the sewer plant? Which do you think would attract more visitors to downtown: the Museum of North Idaho or the Chamber of Commerce and the LCDC?
Seriously, Patrick, do you really think anyone could roll Coeur d’Alene backwards in time? Do you really think anyone wants to? Do you really think that all the citizens of Coeur d’Alene are so shallow that we cannot possibly preserve Coeur d’Alene’s history and heritage while at the same time working to help it prosper?
Comment by Bill — April 10, 2012 @ 12:03 pm
Bill,
Perhaps the issue is simply a combination of groupthink and a “progressive” world view. Some folks want a big government. They do not understand why everyone doesn’t want to have all the benefits a big government can offer. John Austin appears to be one of the “rationalist” types of big government guys, ‘after all, if we do not use that money, someone else will’, is that school of thought. Then there is the emotional type who cannot see past their own wants and the perceived goodies be promised. This is the ultimate challenge of government and one our Founding Fathers saw quite clearly. “Any government big enough and powerful enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.” That was from Gerald Ford. Jefferson’s comment was, “The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground.”
Comment by justinian — April 10, 2012 @ 12:43 pm
Hold onto your hats all……I agree with what Goodlander stated in todays Press. Again I paraphrase, she said that should the recall be successful, it will alter LCDC. Hey Deanna, ya’ think????? And this would be bad because…….?
And the laugh of the day is, large headlines front page above the fold. Fernan (population under 200) issues proclamation against the CDA recall.
Whatever!
Comment by rochereau — April 11, 2012 @ 8:08 am
Goodlander’s statement should, in and of itself, sufficient reason to sign the petitions and vote in favor of the recalls.
Comment by Ancientemplar — April 11, 2012 @ 9:33 am
That makes 2 of us Ancient.
Comment by rochereau — April 11, 2012 @ 2:26 pm