Your Evaluation? « OpenCdA

October 7, 2009

Your Evaluation?

Filed under: Probable Cause — Bill @ 7:19 pm

Did you watch the Coeur d’Alene candidate forums on CDA TV 19 tonight? If so, what is your evaluation of each of the candidates individually and then in comparison with his/her opponent?

Comments (6)

6 Comments

I think all the challengers for CDA City Council seats did well.Steve A.
and Woody M. seemed a little nervous at times but,I don’t know how you can’t help but, be a little nervous.

Dan G, did well and Joe kunka surprised me with his ideas and talked about things nobody else talked about, which are important to this city, like trying to control hybrid gangs etc.I also, liked his idea about cutting administrative costs, by reducing a little these high salaries some of these city employees receive.Some of these people are paid like they live in Boise and we are not Boise.

Comment by kageman — October 7, 2009 @ 8:47 pm
I was out last evening. It will be re-broadcast through the election. Having not actually seen the debate, clearly there are gaps not reported by the Press. However, apparently Goodlander stated that LCDC has brought “hundreds of millions of dollars to CDA”. Uhhh…did anyone push her to break that figure down. This is another priceless opportunity to force her to explain her hyperbole. Without prerssure to clarify, people might actually believe what comes out of her mouth. Apparently Jim Brannon pointed out that with all the budget cuts, urban renewal hasn’t been cut at all. Good point that needs to be hammered home (no pun intended Jim) Mikey “Tweed” K. was pushing benefit down the line vis a vis the education corridor. Benefit to whom Mikey?? Deep groan emanating from my ancient self.

Comment by Faringdon — October 8, 2009 @ 9:09 am
Sorry Jim, don’t know where that “jk” came from. Didn’t mean to change your name.

Comment by Faringdon — October 8, 2009 @ 9:11 am
I watched them all last night – almost missed it but was able to see them all.

I thought Brannon was excellent and very genuine. I am impressed with his honesty – Mike Kennedy is a big talker and I remember him skirting around the real questions and change to telling stories. I did not like his aloof attitude when he poked at his opposition because Brannon was trying to give his viewers a visual aide with his paper. I thought it was very rude and a bully on the block tactic. Brannon as a council member will listen to the people while Kennedy refers to his Costco Test but fails to let his viewers know that he participates on only one blog demeaning people who are CDA citizens.

Adams has my vote. He was nervous at first but came out of it. It did not hurt him at all. What I did not like about Woody, though he is obviously a likeable guy is his continuing reference to being a “restaurant guy” and comparing citizens to under or overcooked eggs. Adams is also about transparency – like having the city checkbook online. Woody blames everything on state law while he admits mistakes at the same time – like spending several grand on fake brick siding.

Gookin nailed it and brought up obvious problems with discrepancies in our budget and how the Education Corridor is not really about education. I have nothing to say about Goodlander. I did not believe a word that came out of her mouth. She almost acted ticked off that she had to even debate. She basically came off that she is Coeur d’Alene. Gookin also believes in treating the citizens with respect even through disagreement, and without public scolding, when the citizens of CDA decide or want to make themselves available to our local government. He looked good and confident.

I got really sick of listening to Bloem’s emphasis on forming her “partnerships.” Just who are they? Then, rubbing it in how much clout she has because she is fourth generation is really outdated. So what? I think having a mayor that works on a gang problem before it is totally uncontrollable over building “places” as Bloem brags about is much more commendable. Kunka is relaxed and I like that.

They all did very well and they will all get my vote. I have to watch it again, did not write any quotes down, but that is my impression.

Comment by Stebbijo — October 8, 2009 @ 2:40 pm
kageman, Faringdon, and Stebbijo,

Thanks for watching the forum and answering. I hope many people in the community watched and learned more about each of the candidates.

Comment by Bill — October 8, 2009 @ 6:37 pm
It is rare that I find myself at a loss for words…and this certainly isn’t one of those times. The problem is where to start! Do I start with the hubris of firing Jim Brannon and then telling the public that it has nothing to do with politics? Tweed Kennedy is the puppet of a powerful man and Jim is opposing him. But, hey, no political intent there. Or do I start with the timing of the firing itself? Clearly intended to throw Jim off his game during the debate. That didn’t work! Opposing Tweedys puppeteer is a CDA no-no and the police state galvanized into action.

I can truthfull say, without being accused of Goodlander style exageration, that I have donated many thousands of dollars to Habitat. I can also say that not one iota of my charitable giving will ever go to Habitat again. There are many needy groups, especially in this economy, and that is where my future giving will go.

In my description of a powerful man, I am actually speaking of one of the bloated frogs croaking loudy in what is, in actuality, a very small pond. Put Tweedy or his boss in New York, LA, Chicago or any other major area and they would be ants dodging the foot of real power. Hey, they would be non starters just about anywhere else……

Whomever wasn’t even smart about this. As they are paying Jim until the end of the month, why not wait before going public. Timing is everything and that was the intent. By calling it “fiscal”, they plant the seed in the voters mind that perhaps Jim isn’t fiscally capable. Nasty, truly nasty!

Comment by Faringdon — October 9, 2009 @ 9:35 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.