It’s not easy to be a candidate for public office. It takes a lot of energy and motivation to attend the events held by a whole list of groups in town that want to hear from those running.
All candidates, both challengers and incumbents, should attend ALL of the events. Remember they are running to represent ALL the people of the community, not just those who vote for them.
City Councilman Mike Kennedy did NOT attend last night’s candidate forum at the CdA Senior Center. His chair was empty and his opponent, Jim Brannon, did a great job of answering the questions posed. Jim is the Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity, and he knows how to get things done.
I attended last night’s debate and thought the challengers did a great job.
The incumbents were scrambling to put a pretty face on everything. Deanna Goodlander is living in a fairy tale land when she revises history to say how perfect everything in CdA is and how fabulously wonderful all city officials have been. Even Woody admitted that the $400,000 spent by LCDC on the fake brick siding on the condo building downtown was a big mistake.
Dan Gookin brought a very dramatic graph of the rise in property tax rates in CdA during the last 8 years that Deanna has been in office. But Deanna has never met a TAX INCREASE she didn’t love. She’s on the board of the LCDC and supports everything they do. She must have used the word “opportunity” three dozen times last night.
When the question about the $10 per YEAR lease of the Harbor Center building to the U of I came up, Deanna waxed on and on about what a great opportunity it was…
Dan’s answer was first-rate. He explained to everyone that state law says a city can lease away property IF they don’t need it for their own use. Then he detailed how CdA pays extra to rent space down on Sherman Avenue for city workers while it leases away the Harbor Center space to U of I for $10 (ten dollars) per year. The BIG kicker was when he explained that the U of I then SUB-LEASES space in the Harbor Center to another college and a business, which brings the U of I over $400,000 per year!!
Deanna’s answer to his great explanation?—she did not deny or correct one bit of his information, she just said, again, that leasing to the U of I is a “great opportunity”.
Allow me to take this “opportunity” (and a great one it is) to comment that small empty minds grind exceeding slow. Poor Deanna is not just slow on the uptake, to her the concept is non-existant. Switching to the serious, Deanna cannot make coherent statements on any subject simply because the comprehension is not there. She doesn’t make the connection, for instance, that the citizens of CDA would be well served to have that $400K income go to the city instead of UI. Did anyone ask Deanna to expound on just what exactly she means by “great opportunity”? I suspect that Deanna memorizes (or perhaps writes on her palm) some stock generic answers. What it comes down to is arrogance. She has been around since the earth had a crust. (I am not elder bashing, so have I) It matters not how she behaves, she has always been re-elected. She expects to spend the rest of her existance telling the good citizens of CDA just how she is creating yet more “great opportunities” to waste their tax dollar.
And speaking of arrogance, that is the one word reason that Mike Kennedy did not show up. Hey, he has his political machine working and his insider movers and shakers supporting him. So just why should he actually take part in the process? He is above mixing with commoners, sit and answer questions on his positions? Seriously, you jest. (I can tell you his position; it is whatever will please his boss and whatever will be in Mikey K’s best interest). To me, Mike is the quintessential political wonk. Had he lived in a previous century, he would have been a Tamany Hall boss.
Comment by Faringdon — October 2, 2009 @ 3:16 pm
Faringdon,
Tammany Hall? Wow! You are showing your
ageaccumulated years of wisdom.Comment by Bill — October 2, 2009 @ 3:35 pm
Thank-you Mary for providing us with some real information on the debate.
How interesting that, “Even Woody admitted that the $400,000 spent by LCDC on the fake brick siding on the condo building downtown was a big mistake.”
So how many other BIG mistakes have been made that Woody will admit to so he can gather the sucker vote? Is he trying to tell us, that he’s going to change things if we re-elect him? All of this from a guy, who still votes to let the LCDC run with taxpayer money, and in almost the same breath, he tells us we need to trust government? Well, I am convinced, I don’t trust him.
Comment by Stebbijo — October 2, 2009 @ 3:47 pm
Mike Kennedy and Tammany Hall? A perfect match!
Stebbijo, Woody was in good spirits, and I do like him as a person. I gave him a big hug. But he’s got to go! He’s unable to see straight and, when he does get the gumption to ask some good questions, he is easily manipulated by the powers-that-be and caves in to vote along with the rest of them. He’s lost any sense of perspective. Steve Adams kind of stumbled in his closing remarks when he said that Woody is all used up. But it was a Freudian Slip, of sorts; it was an accurate portrayal of the truth. It’s time for Woody to go, as well as Deanna, Mike K and Sandi. We need new vision and focus in City Hall! And a lot fewer “connections”.
Comment by mary — October 2, 2009 @ 4:03 pm
McEvers’ nonchalant and careless attitude about the public trust and public treasury is completely unacceptable for any public official. On the list of desirable qualities for a public official, “likable” is below other traits such as worthy of trust and confidence, competent, attentive, and diligent. We are trying to pick a council member, not a cocker spaniel puppy.
Comment by Bill — October 2, 2009 @ 4:50 pm
Bill darlin’, as stated, I was witness to the big bang. And sometimes I feel every second of those millenia. I thought there were 2 m’s in Tammany, should have gone with my instinct. I’m terrible with double letters. Actually, I was a history-political science major in college. Probably because I had a fantastic history teacher in high school. I have heard whisperings that Mikey K. has a picture of Boss Tweed on his wall. A role model perhaps…..
Back to serious, excellent point re Woody. I’ve never met him, will take Mary’s word that he is likeable. (Personally, I can’t get past the aging hippy persona) He makes statements that makes one grimmace. The “brick” was just one of many. My all time favorite was the “we trust you guys”. I would like to see him stand up and roar in council meetings. Not going to happen, but wouldn’t it be nice. Hey Woody, how is this for a concept, stand up for yourself and, most improtantly, your constituency. Well, one can dream…
Next time Deanna makes the “great opportunity” statement, and she will, someone should push her very hard to elucidate on what exactly she means by that oft used statement.
Comment by Faringdon — October 3, 2009 @ 11:22 am
Love to see ol’ Ross Perot holding up his kitchen broom and declaring in his squeaky voice,
“Well folks, we gonna talk about it or are we gonna do it?
It’s time to sweep out the barn folks!”
In the eleventh hour, I may end up voting for Woody. I find him somewhat refreshing and think he may just be more “crazy like a fox” than some give him credit for. Not 100% sure yet on that vote however.
As for all others, OUT!
Absolutely spot on with the analysis of Kennedy, pure politics, 24X7 in all he does. He is like a Clintonite in the way he calculates every comment, every public appearance, every buzz word aimed at making a positive impression. His disrespect and bullying when public comment does not shed him in a positive light is not worthy of a publicly elected official. It is pretty well known that he was “planted” here by the Boise democratic powers for future use. If left unchecked, he well become mayor one day, perhaps a state senator. It is like watching the life cycle a one-man political “Sleeper Cell”, right here in the City By The Lake.
Comment by CDAShenanigans — October 5, 2009 @ 10:28 am
Do you want, “Hey guys, we gotta give folks stuff they want”, or “If you guys can’t trust the government, who can you trust?” Refreshing or nice is not good enough. Taxpayers need representatives capable of critical thinking, at a minimum.
Comment by Gary Ingram — October 5, 2009 @ 11:12 am
Sorry CDA Shenanigins…to compare Woody to a fox is grossly unfair to the fox. You must go on what Woody utters and how he behaves with his vote. He is terrified of the other board members and muddled is the kindest description I can come up with. That he is likeable, and Mary says he is, has absolutely nothing to do with his ability on the council. Blundering stupid comments are not refreshing, they are costly $$$. The city council is not in place to entertain us. They are “supposed” to represent the citizens of CDA and to ALWAYS do that which is in the best interest of the city and its inhabitants. Clearly, they have a real problem with that concept. By his own admission, Woody will blindly believe anything the special interest groups say and will cast his vote accordingly. Just look at his record. Refreshing is a dive into a cool pool on a hot day, not a flagrant disregard for the duties of his office.
As far as Mikey K. goes, he may well become Mayor one day. That he is in place for a reason is obvious. What I question is why him? He looks like exactly what he is. You could put his picture on a wall with a sign that asks “would you trust this politician” and the answer would be no. A political plant I understand….just not this choice. Unless the only other option was Thom George…
Comment by Faringdon — October 5, 2009 @ 11:52 am
I was reviewing the transcript of Woody’s famous “trust the government” line and I kind of taken back by another one. Do you think there is any real bark in this statement? “I think you guys’ll do a good job, and if you don’t, Al’ll come after you, and Ron will too.”
Comment by Stebbijo — October 5, 2009 @ 1:40 pm
OK, OK,,,enough already on the Woody comment. You’d think I’d just nominated David Letterman for Secretary of Women’s Rights.
The way you’all describe Woody, he sounds scarily like Rick Currie in his stumbling, bumbling and indecisive ways.
Nobody will ever convince me that Woody’s vote is “owned” by outside interests like other council members. I’ll concede that maybe he is too much of a waffler and can be swayed too easily to maintain his own independent thoughts.
Comment by CDAShenanigans — October 5, 2009 @ 2:13 pm
Stebbijo,
What McEvers revealed with that statement is that he won’t be the one to hold others accountable. He’ll pass the buck to someone else. Just let him play with the toys at CDA TV 19 and McEvers is happy. But when it comes to holding people like NIC or the LCDC accountable, he’s willing to let someone else carry the load.
Comment by Bill — October 5, 2009 @ 2:13 pm
CDAShenanigans,
Your comments about Woody are pretty darn accurate. He is a friendly guy who always goes along with the desires of the council. He repeatly says he is just an old surfer trying to understand how government works.
Comment by LTR — October 5, 2009 @ 8:13 pm
Yet Woody insinuated that Steve Adams, his opponent, is not ready to be on the council because he doesn’t know how city hall works. My observation is that Woody constantly tells us that HE doesn’t understand it either.
My impression of Steve Adams is that he knows what he believes and stands by his values of limited government and lower taxes. I don’t think he would be confused about how to vote.
Comment by mary — October 5, 2009 @ 9:45 pm
CDA-s…Letterman comment, too too funny.
I agree, Woody probably isn’t “owned”. The problem is, he votes with those who are (owned). So, sort of same difference, if you will. When he does make a comment that is counter to Sandi Bloems “received wisdom”, it is just talk. He ultimately votes with the sharks. On a personal level, I do have a problem with an adult who claims to represent the tax payer, hanging on to the “aging surfer, old hippy” persona. It is the thought process that puzzles me.
Comment by Faringdon — October 6, 2009 @ 9:24 am
Just remembered, I read an interview with Woody in the Press. In that interview, he clearly states that when he ran and was elected to the council, he didn’t know anything about how city govt. works. So, I ask, why does he now say that is a negative for Steve Adams. Another point he should be pressed to explain at the next question and answer meeting.
Comment by Faringdon — October 6, 2009 @ 9:27 am
I remember that also, Farindon, and Woody continues to say he’s “confused”, or “doesn’t get it”, all the time. Then he votes with the others, all the time.
You know who else frequently admits to being “confused”? Mike Kennedy. He says it over and over again. Just check out the meetings on Channel 19.
We need people who READ THEIR INFORMATION PACKETS and come to the meetings ready to pay attention, not toddle out for coffee every 10 minutes, or to the bathroom because of the coffee, or nod off to sleep like Deanna Goodlander seems to do on a regular basis.
These are not personal attacks, these are concerns about the official behavior of our elected city council members while they are ON THE JOB.
Comment by mary — October 6, 2009 @ 10:14 am
I agree, Mary. Public attendance at meetings is so important. Cable coverage is an asset; however, the camera is able to cover only one person at a time, so the actions and reactions of the entire council is missed. How many times have you seen Deanna aparently napping on camera? The camera does catch her forgetting the wording of motions she just made, however. The use of laptops may be handy and cut the amount of paper used, but it appears to me that council members hide behind them. Of course, the mayor writes incessantly at meetings. I wonder what she does with the volumes of paper she creates.
On another note, Victoria Bruno’s City Street article in the press was nothing more than a very thinly veiled city endorsement of Deanna. This was a piece originated at City Hall. This along with Dixie’s in council endorsement of John Bruning indicates a mayor and council that doesn’t believe the rules apply to them.
Comment by Susie Snedaker — October 7, 2009 @ 8:24 am