Outer Limits of Term Limits

I was going to write separate pieces about the SOLdotna City Council elections and the borough-wide term-limits ballot proposition, but when I started to think about it, the fact that every council seat has a challenger running against an incumbent (or has two new candidates squaring off) completes the argument against any sort of need for term limits.

As you listen to ACT, they say we need term limits for several reasons: to oust entrenched politicians, to get fresh blood involved, and to have elected officials listen to the will of the people. Never mind that term limits are just another way to restrict your freedom by taking away your right to vote for the candidate of your choice; forget about the dedication and experience of those who have been involved in government; and please ignore that when we elect someone, that IS the will of the people in that district. Oh, and don't confuse them with the facts that in recent borough elections incumbents HAVE lost to challengers (John Williams, Betty Glick, John Davis, Mike Navarre to mention a few).

So, here in river city, there are folks who are unhappy with the way the mayor and city council have handled the cemetery issue. What is there to do? Challenge the status quo and present candidates for the city council that offer us a different perspective. Democracy at work. If people feel strongly enough about something, our system of government, especially on the local level, allows for people to get involved and be the change that they seek.

Have you noticed that ACT doesn't present candidates for office? Their excuse is that they don't present candidates. Oh, I see. They feel strongly about issues and want to unseat incumbents, but they don't want to bother actually running against an incumbent.

You may wonder why ACT has its no-candidate policy. Exhibit A would be Vicki Pate, one of ACT's loudest mouths in an organization of loud mouths. She ran for school board a few years ago and was thoroughly trounced in the election. Of course, she had to say a few words about why she was running and her reasons were simple: she wanted to do away with public schools and cut all of its funding. Those in ACT have one basic agenda - cut their taxes in order to cut government. But they do want all of the government services that someone else has to pay for: police, fire, health care, road repairs, snow plowing and etc. They just want the tooth fairy to pay for it all. Or you and me. Once they actually speak about what they want to accomplish, the only ones that are going to vote for them are those on the fringe.

ACT is all about having the minority rule. Remember the first borough initiative that they managed to pass? It required a super majority (61%) of the vote for the borough to authorize any spending over $1 million. That means that the minority (41%) controlled the will of the rest of the voters.

Rather than put a candidate against Gary Superman in Nikiski, they hope to term-limit him out so someone can run unopposed for that seat. Ron Long and Pete Sprague won their assembly seats by well over 60% of the votes in their districts, but Ron is now term-limited out and Pete will be out the next cycle. Clearly these candidates have the support of the citizens, but they don't agree with ACT's agenda. Since no candidate that espoused the ACT agenda would find much support in SOLdotna or Seward, ACT is trying to get their way by removing candidates that they don't agree with by term limits rather than by a direct challenge.

ACT is all about suppressing your vote and about taking away your freedoms as a way to accomplish their goals.

And that is exactly how tyranny works.

ACT Won: A Peninsula Travesty

At last night's borough assembly meeting, upon reconsideration, the assembly defeated the measure that would have put the mayor vs manager style of government on the ballot this fall. Homer's Bill Smith was the swing vote, as he changed his mind from last month. He noted that no one from the public came to an assembly meeting and spoke in favor of having a borough manager over a strong mayor.

ACT, however, testifies at every borough assembly meeting held in Soldotna and their message is that they are the voice of the people of Kenai.

They sure as hell don't speak for me. Here's a sampling of some of their testimony.

Viki Pate has no trouble justifying ACT's flip-flop on this issue (remember, ACT was for having a manager before they were against it). She stated that when ACT was for it, it was because they wanted competent government. But when the assembly tried to move the issue to the ballot for people to actually decide for themselves, Pate accused the assembly of being fascists. Huh?!?

Fred Sturman attempts to come across as a folksy voice of reason but is full of unsubstantiated statistics to support his idea that borough needs to cut the budget. He never offers any specific cut options and is blind to pay raises Mayor Carey gave to his staff and the deficit spending budget Carey proposes. Fred offers the occasional verbal gems like last night's declaration that the 80s were so like the.....80s.

Debbie Holle Brown only speaks to the assembly when something is very dearly important to her - but she seems to have something to say about everything even when she has noting to say. Well, maybe she has something to say, but darn if I've been able to figure out exactly what that is. She usually tries to make her point by yapping on about something else and then as her 3 minutes are winding down, rushes to tie together the loose ends that she spun. Last night she even had the audacity to ask for "A special eduction IEP for testifying"so that people like her could ramble on forever. So, she spent about 2 minutes saying that she couldn't get her point across in 3 minutes. Geez, just stick to what is pertinent and maybe you could.

The angry Kasilof woman who sometimes is in too much of a hurry to put all of her clothes on is another example of those speaking as the voice of the Kenai. When I hear her rage, I wonder if there should be a metal detector at these meetings.

These folks have become the most powerful force on the Kenai - but just what are they promoting? Viki Pate would do away with all public schools, Fred Sturman would eliminate most all borough services. It's a mystery what Debbie Brown wants as she is not capable of articulating a clear thought. Those who have followed her political career when she was a member of the school board know that she doesn't know much of anything. And those whose nuts are about to slip off of the remaining threads of their sanity are easily manipulated. The Kenai is not immune to crazed gun-wielding whackos.

In other assembly news, the ordinance that would have put the sports dome on the ballot this fall was tabled after the group that brought the measure forward withdrew their support for now. Despite being tabled (and any attempt to bring it back would have to start the process anew), Debbie Brown and others spoke against it, maybe just to hear themselves talk. I don't think the ordinance would stand a chance to pass and I wouldn't support it because there are so many winter sports to enjoy here - why create an expensive artificial indoor environment in these days of high fuel costs. We are a northern state with tremendous winter sport opportunities.

Oh no, did I just agree with ACT on something?

Pay Day at the Borough Building

One thing I don't get about Mayor Carey's support by ACT is Dave's generosity with the tax-payer's money when it comes to pay for staff. Both Hugh Chumley and Susan Wilcox pull in over $90K a year - in comparison, William's Chief of Staff, Tim Navarre, drew a salary in the $70K range. In addition, his Administrative assistant, draws a salary about $10K more than anyone in the borough that does a similar job.

How can ACT champion Mayor Dave as a fiscal conservative, while ignoring this administrative excess?