Editorial: From the recall ashes - Coeur d'Alene Press: Local News

Editorial: From the recall ashes

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 5:00 am

The bid to recall four Coeur d’Alene city officials failed, a lack of petition signature oxygen leading to political asphyxiation.

One side is celebrating. The other is commiserating. And in between is a big camp of constituents who simply want the appropriate electoral process to resume so citizens may choose their elected representatives.

As tempting as it is for anyone to read volumes of irrefutable truths into the failure, now is the time for the community to take a deep breath, exhale slowly and think clearly. Knee-jerk reactions based on emotion, rather than reason, will only deepen the divide. A little time for healing and for real analysis to take place will pay huge dividends. React quickly with emotion, and we’ll just end up back in some similar mess a little further down the road.

It is our hope that the recall supporters do not resort to legal channels in pursuit of their goals. If they do, they’ll be forcing taxpayers to defend the targeted city officials — an expense we’re certain the recall supporters do not ideologically or fiscally support. Perhaps more importantly, by employing legal options they’d keep fires burning that should be allowed to die out. The ashes from those fires can actually nurture the community in time and make it stronger.

If those who support the recall believe they’ve heard an ultimatum from the citizenry, they should recruit highly qualified candidates to run against the targeted incumbents. Put the same time, energy and expense into the campaign for 2013 as you did this recall attempt and you will know, without question, how the majority feels about their elected representatives. You’ll just have to wait a little longer to get your answer.

On the other side, it would be tempting for the victors to vilify those who carried the recall banner. That won’t get the community anywhere, either. Group hugs across political battle lines might not be forthcoming, but a failure of the victors to respectfully and gracefully move forward would keep the previously mentioned fires ablaze. Both sides need to let them go out.

Finally, it is our hope that those in city leadership — elected, appointed and otherwise — engage in serious analysis of how and why the community came to this crossroads. Rather than rely on anecdotes, gut feelings and small samplings, determine the root cause or causes of this eruption. How much of it was based on personal vendettas? How much on council decisions and direction, ranging from employee pay and urban renewal operations to visions of change for community assets? How much on the way the city communicates with its constituents?

Learn the answers to these and other important questions, and share those answers with the community. By better understanding what the hell happened to us, maybe we can avoid repeating it.

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.

74 comments:

  • manman posted at 2:08 am on Wed, Jul 25, 2012.

    manman Posts: 46

    In the summer for a pair of oakley frogskin is necessary, but if you choose a vice inferior, not qualified oakley frogskins, not only can't resist ultraviolet ray,oakley frogskins sunglasses and will make the pupil grow larger and as a result,the oakley sunglasses frogskins of the eye more food ultraviolet ray, so the adornment of Oakley Frogskin Black is not an option. So, what should be paid attention to choose oakley frogskins polarized? .In large area on the water, the clouds or snow had better wear oakley frogskins black science wearing Buy Black Oakley Frogskins can prevent what common eye diseases?human life can not do without the sun, but too much sun will damage the eyes and can cause eye of acute damage, such as is because the snow on the large area (or the clouds and calm waters) reflex the light from the sun, the outer layer of the eye is caused by ultraviolet radiation burns, the typical symptoms of pain, dry eyes, tears, gravel foreign body sensation, skin flush, conjunctival congestion, edema, etc. Too much sun also can cause chronic eye diseases, such as cataract, macular degeneration, pterygium, chronic conjunctivitis and so on. Research has suggested that, these kinds of disease incidence in high altitude area is obviously low altitude area to high, just because of the high altitude because of strong ultraviolet ray. So, scientific wear oakley frogskin Orange, on the one hand,Oakley Frogskin Sunglasses Orange can prevent ultraviolet radiation acute burn eyes, on the other hand, we can prevent the eyes of chronic diseases.go out oakley frogskins Orange is the sun will need to wear Buy Orange Oakley Frogskins? the sun light is stronger,Oakley Frogskin Sunglasses Pink or the surrounding environment reflected the sun is stronger (be like place oneself in the large area above the surface glance), they need to wear Oakley Frogskins Pink, otherwise does not need to wear. Whether wearing Oakley Frogskin Pink, mainly with the sun light intensity will decide, do not to season will decide, because different season, different regions of the sun's light intensity Buy Pink Oakley Frogskins is very big.

     
  • meesterbox posted at 10:52 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    Ok LTR - just to clarify, I am not trying to answer any of your questions, I am just correcting your incorrect information for all the readers out there.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 6:35 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Meesterbox:

    I said the underground parking structure will be removed according to the Mayor. You know the one that was estimated to take $7,305,405.

    Please don't try to answer any questions for me Meesterbox. I would rather wait until the Design Team presents their infor. to the Council. You are just rattling on and on.

     
  • meesterbox posted at 6:02 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    They aren't removing the parking. The Mayor clearly stated the lower level being removed from the plan. It is called the Parking Facility Centenial Level Add Alternate. If you think otherwise, ask someone involved with the project.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 4:47 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Meesterbox:

    I am not the one confused.

    Go to McEuen Currents and see the $7M underground parking structure on the drawings.

    BUDGET
    •Mass Grading: $1,393,270
    •Park Development: $ 2,194,780
    •Front Ave. Imp. & Promenade $ 1,072,550
    •Parking Structure: $ 7,305,405
    •East Parking Lot $ 323,950
    •A & E/Const. Services $ 1,956,177
    –Total: $ 14,246,132

     
  • meesterbox posted at 2:20 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    Your comment doesn't make sense LTR. I think you are confused. The cost for the upgrades to the park are currently estimated around $14M. The $7M is in reference to to lower level of parking that was proposed with the original high end estimate of $39M. So that $7M disappeared when the new design for the park eliminated the lowest level of parking. Hopefully I have enlightened you. If not, maybe someone else can give it a go.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 2:11 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Meesterbox has a double personality! He preaches grace on the Press and reveals his agenda in the Spokesman Review.

    Spokesman Review DFO Blog
    meesterbox on June 20 at 10:55 a.m.

    Yes, do come join the party!

    I had a commenter on the press yesterday try and call us out for been so few saying that it is clear there are more that want the “chosen 4” out than want to keep them in. Here was my response:

    Times are changing. You will find more and more of us commenting on here to correct all the vitriol usually posted. Many of you have bullied the reasonable voice from this site, but we are going to continue to stand up, correct your inaccurate posts, and provide CdA citizens with the truth.

    Obviously, HBO gets all my love, but it is time we stop the bullies on the Press from getting away with their usual shenanigans.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 2:01 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Meesterbox: My comment to a underground parking facility was as the Mayor stated.

    You are speading too much time assuming that I am someone else. I watched the Council meeting online and was not at the actual meeting.

    I did hear the Mayor say the McEuen Park improvements will still cost $14M even after removing the $7M underground parking facility. Perhaps you can enlighten us on where the $7M is going?

     
  • meesterbox posted at 12:43 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    Mary, I am not an elections specialist (you probably should take this up with Mr. Hayes and let us know what you find out), but I gave your question some thought: ...my question is if someone is already a registered voter, and has filled out the card with their SS#, birthdate, and all the info that doesn't change, then they move to a different location within the city. If they don't update their address at the Elections Office, they can, as you mentioned earlier today, update their new address at the polls when they go to vote. The poll worker just writes the new address in the poll book and then the person signs and dates the entry.

    I will first point out Idaho Code 34-404. REGISTRATION OF ELECTORS. (1) ...Registration of a qualified person occurs when a legible, accurate and complete registration card is received in the office of the county clerk or is received at the polls pursuant to section 34-408A, Idaho Code.

    According to Idaho Code, your petitioners are not authorized to register voters, but they can collect the cards and turn them in to the county office where they would be date stamped and accept at that point as registered voters. So I am not sure why your petitioners would be authorized to correct the address of a registered voter when they legally can’t even register them. That is why, in my opinion, the two methods (poll vs. petitioner) are not equally as reliable and useful. Not to mention I am pretty sure you have to provide proper photo identification and dated proof of residence at the county elections office or at the polls to prove your change of address. Your petitioners were not asking for identification at all.

    As I mentioned yesterday, Mr. McCrory said, it is my responsibility as a citizen and a voter to ensure that my voter registration information is up-to-date and that I know what is on it. It is his, mine, yours, every citizens responsibility. I don't see how any of this can be said was a last minute decision by the Sec. of State. Seems like they were just following the law.

    You have been given the benefit of the doubt in regards to the 300-400 people that your team registered as voters, because according to Idaho Code they weren't registered voters until either the card was received by the county clerk or at the polls by an authorized person. So we could sit here and say that the people that filled out the registration card with one of you petitioners and then signed your petition weren't actually registered because their registration card hadn't met the above lawful requirements before they signed the petition.

    But, as I said yesterday, it is time for our community to respectfully and gracefully move forward and I think you should do the same.

     
  • meesterbox posted at 12:33 pm on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    LTRLTR - If you read this, I just wanted to clarify and/or correct your last comment re: Mayor Bloem announced at the June 19 Council meeting that the under ground parking facility is removed from the McEuen Park plan because the cost of $7M was too high.

    It sounds like you might think they are removing the entire parking facility. They have decided not to include the lower level of the parking facility that would have potentially cost around $7 million, not the entire structure. This was when the Mayor was responding to your question about the $39 million vs. the $14 million and how many items have been permanently dropped. She did a great job of addressing your query.

    If I miss understood your earlier comment, hope what I added clarified to others that read what you had said.

     
  • Jullee posted at 11:18 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    Jullee Posts: 540

    Mary , Your question is very valid. Hopefully the new Clerk can answer,. What makes the personal information gathered on the re-call petition any different than information gathered at the polls ?
    This is an issue that needs to be addressed by the city also.
    I get a feeling that if the voting had been for retaining these people , the change in addresses and personal information would have been updated and accepted.

     
  • PF Idaho Native posted at 11:08 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    PF Idaho Native Posts: 10

    I just finished 3 leadership classes. The City Council has failed as leaders to address the concerns of the public, otherwise the public would be on board with the new park. If we don't get everybody on board we will eventually fail to promote our agendas. This is going to bite the city council in the rump one way or another until they act like leaders and cancel what isn't fully supported by the public.

     
  • the floorist posted at 8:58 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    the floorist Posts: 331

    Deflect...deflect...deflect...

    Your presumptions are what got you in this ridiculous mess...hunny...

    They're waiting, "Timeless". Sing it, country girl...

     
  • Always Curious posted at 8:44 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    Always Curious Posts: 489

    @Timeless ... Why do you frequently clutter things with your Mary-bashing, inquisition style, pointless posts? Your personal problem and online vendetta with Ms. Souza hasn't been as sublime as you might have hoped.

    Mr. English graciously replied to a previous query. Ms. Souza made a few observations and then asked Mr. English for his thoughts. A reasonable discussion. Adult-style.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 7:32 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Very interesting...Mayor Bloem announced at the June 19 Council meeting that the under ground parking facility is removed from the McEuen Park plan because the cost of $7M was too high.

     
  • Timeless posted at 6:50 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 479

    Mary:

    Why aren't you asking your County Clerk these questions , as opposed to Dan English?

    Floorist:

    You still seem a little crazy to me. Posting here at 2:25 am? Get some sleep buddy.
    Khe::::khe:::: Tsr. :::Hehe:::

     
  • the floorist posted at 2:25 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    the floorist Posts: 331

    Yanno...

    I could not comfortably sleep on the fact that some folks feel Mr. Patrick is a person to fault for expressing his humble opinion. Fact is he's absolutely correct...on all fronts.

    There is something that recently transpired that forever changes the current course of "Team McEuen"...

    ...(they) just suck at admitting anything openly...

    ...despite that supposed, "...communication..." thetic and all...

    ...huh, Mr. Kennedy...?

     
  • the floorist posted at 12:14 am on Thu, Jun 21, 2012.

    the floorist Posts: 331

    Miss "Timeless"...

    You're deflecting more now than ever...and to watch it is pathetic...

    Tell 'em ALL why you had your recent "boat parking" meltdown en forum...

    I know...

    ::::leer::::: Ya' bch... hehehhehehe

     
  • Mary Souza posted at 8:53 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Mary Souza Posts: 792

    Thanks for the info, Dan. But my question is if someone is already a registered voter, and has filled out the card with their SS#, birthdate, and all the info that doesn't change, then they move to a different location within the city. If they don't update their address at the Elections Office, they can, as you mentioned earlier today, update their new address at the polls when they go to vote. The poll worker just writes the new address in the poll book and then the person signs and dates the entry.

    The Recall petition form is exactly the same information; it updates the already existing registration information with new street address, city, signature and date. Just the same as at the polls. And it includes a legal statement of affirmation that the information provided is true and accurate.

    Why are these two methods not equally as reliable and useful? Why disenfranchise hundreds of people who are valid electors in the city? Their intent is clear, Dan: They wanted to sign the petitions in order to get a vote on the four officials. Not to allow their signatures is an unfair interpretation of the law made by the Sec. of State at the very last minute.

     
  • Dan English posted at 8:08 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Dan English Posts: 158

    Mary, my reading and understanding of the code section below is that for a person to register, or re-reigister as the case may be, they must complete an approved voter registration card. I don't have one in front of me or the petition form that was used, but I would guess an actual registration card has more required information than is on the petition form. They have some things in common but of course are designed and used for different purposes.

    While some things, like absentee ballot requests for example, can be made my about anyone (and many candidates and the parties design their own forms for their voter drives) as long as they have the required information on them they are accepted. But that is the case with voter registration cards.

    34-404. Registration of electors. (1) All electors must register before being able to vote at any primary, general, special, school or any other election governed by the provisions of title 34, Idaho Code. Registration of a qualified person occurs when a legible, accurate and complete registration card is received in the office of the county clerk or is received at the polls pursuant to section 34-408A, Idaho Code.

    Also, 34-411 gives the full list of the required content for the voter registration card.

     
  • CaiusCosades posted at 7:39 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    CaiusCosades Posts: 380

    Mary: EPIC FAIL

     
  • concernedcitizen posted at 6:00 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    concernedcitizen Posts: 2530

    I see thommyboy, who doesn't even live here, has come to bash Mary.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 5:54 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Ziggy: Good comments. It's a "NO WIN" situation.

    I hold the Mayor and 3-Council Members responsible for the division in the community. They knew that many in the community would oppose the McEuen Park plan and that is why they would not permit an advisory vote. Just as Councilman McEvers said "it is what it is".


     
  • bionic man posted at 5:44 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    bionic man Posts: 347

    Pure and simple explanation for the results of the recall...

    Kennedy vs opponent................

    Fantastic 4 vs recall...................

    Do I need to say anymore.....................

    Welcome to " CORRUPT D ALENE "

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 5:31 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    The above article does have some good advice, " now is the time for the community to take a deep breath, exhale slowly and think clearly. Knee-jerk reactions based on emotion, rather than reason, will only deepen the divide."

    However, Timeless and Meesterbox, either can't read, doesn't experience emotion, doesn't care or just can't tell DFO "NO?


     
  • inclined posted at 5:12 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    inclined Posts: 682

    It may be that the tea leaves are a bit tricky for the uninitiated, but it will be clear in time. And if there are points of law worth contemplating, straight up, getting at fact and preponderance of evidence, and for more than even principle's sake, more than petty back and forth---it is already being considered.

    It is not like the old days. There are footprints, and forensics. If there is chicanery(and the preliminaries will soon discover that), it becomes the responsibility of rule of law, even if our matters are relatively provincial, not to treat the sanctity of the ballot flippantly.

     
  • Jullee posted at 5:06 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Jullee Posts: 540

    Good point Mary...Why were these votes rejected ? These people are legitimate registered voters.
    Dan.. Please explain.

     
  • Ziggy posted at 4:43 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Ziggy Posts: 1164

    The failure of the recall effort is hardly an endorsement of the incumbents. It is quite the opposite. It is a huge wake up call which will probably be ignored. Too bad.

     
  • Mary Souza posted at 4:31 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Mary Souza Posts: 792

    Anytime there's an article about the hydroplanes, I'll be happy to discuss that topic on an appropriate thread. This is not it. This editorial was about the Recall and Dan English just posted his opinion that "signing petitions are in a different category and probably with good reason."

    Dan, could you please explain why someone who lives and is registered to vote in one CdA home but then moves next door, should not be able to sign a petition to get a vote? (this actually happened) On the petition form, every person signing is affirming that "I am a registered elector of the City of Coeur d'Alene, my residence, post office address, and date I signed the petition are correctly written after my name."

    It's a legal document, isn't it Dan? So, in essence, by writing in their new CdA address, and affirming it with their signature and date, aren't they updating their voter registration information?

     
  • chouli posted at 4:24 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    chouli Posts: 1270

    THANK YOU cd1013.

    You have said it all with dignity and I agree with you 100%

     
  • cd1013 posted at 4:07 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    cd1013 Posts: 160

    After a day of work it's good to log on and see the usual here. Some who have thoughtful comment and of course others with their personal attacks that divert attention from the topic at hand. Because I was asked I'll reply directly to "Timeless" who thinks that Mary Souza is my "fearless leader". Mary Souza, Frank Orzell or anyone else for that matter is NOT my leader in any way, shape or form. On this particular issue I agree with them. They are in my mind citizens in this communtity who, along with others, have guts and courage to stand up for what they believe in and put their name to it and in these blogs. Unlike you or me, but for the record and for anyone who cares to know my name is Carlos DeHerrera. I'm a 20+ year resident of Cd'A. I vote my conscience and have in the past have voted FOR Mayor Bloem, Councilmembers Kennedy and McEvers. Now if you "Timeless" have what it takes let us know who you be. Some how I doubt that will happen and that's fine.

    If you read my post you might have seen that for me this is about an advisory vote. Not uncommon in Cd'A and Mayor Bloem has called for them in the past so nothing new to her. With a divided council after the 2011 elections it should have been crystal clear to Mayor Bloem that the citizens of this city have a strong opinion when it comes to spending millions of dollars on the renovation of McEuen and the on going attempts to remove the 3rd St. boat launch. When asked again to allow an advisory vote Mayor Bloem and the other pro members still held tight and voted against giving the people a chance to voice their opinion. Recall was a last resort. Over 5000 signatures!! Even though all couldn't be validated I'm sure all are proud to have had a chance to put pen to paper. I am proud to be one of the validated. Thank you to those who stood up and started this grassroots movement.

    In RE: to Mrs.Souza and Hydroplane races I really don't know what that has to do with anything but will say this. If the citizens of Cd'A voted against it as an event within the city what's the issue with having it in county space? Better yet let's see if the Cd'A Tribe would like to host races on their part of the lake and they can profit from it. So in regards to that I have no opinion one way or the other.

    So there you have it. I hope this has given you a better understanding of who I am as a citizen. I think I'll head downtown to support some local vendors at the Wednesday Farmer's Market. You may continue with your mudslinging and have a good day. :)

     
  • chouli posted at 3:57 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    chouli Posts: 1270

    the huck crowd has been instructed to step up the mayhem on this site. just keep ignoring it and maybe it will go away. there's no reasoning or real conversation going on, just more of the hate trying to fuel a fire.

    there is no reason to inject the hydroplane races into this conversation. that's another conversation entirely. and it doesn't have anything to do with the city of cda. they just want to attack Mary for any reason, real or trumped up. where's the weilder of the "cooler" for this site?

    the more they point fingers and accuse, the more they impeach themselves. remember, respectfully and gracefully move forward... LOL

     
  • Dan English posted at 3:46 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Dan English Posts: 158

    The reason that people who have moved from one point in the city to another still have a chance to "redeem" their vote on election day is because, to it's credit, Idaho has same day registration.

    This is an important safety net to allow those who haven't kept their voter registration up to date to still, with proof of 30 day residency and ID, to re-register and be able to vote on election day or in-person absentee..

    Signing petitions are in a different category and probably with good reason.

     
  • cal gal posted at 2:06 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    cal gal Posts: 18

    We may be heading into the time of Who is Mary? A has been, that Never was.

     
  • Thaddeus posted at 1:59 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Thaddeus Posts: 232

    As anyone who has had the misfortune of being drawn in to Scary Mary's cross hairs will tell you, even when she is caught red handed, she will NEVER admit she was wrong.

    She proved that long ago when she secretly tape recorded her neighbor then denied it ever happened.

     
  • Buzzkill posted at 1:39 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Buzzkill Posts: 41

    @Always,

    I knew the answer to the question. I just wanted to see if Mary could admit it. Of course, she couldn't.

     
  • uncle fester posted at 1:33 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    uncle fester Posts: 831

    Sounds like Rodney King, "cant we all just get along?"

     
  • Timeless posted at 1:32 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 479

    Souza:

    Not "officially" no, but you are involved all right. Otherwise, where is the outrage at the County or the State for allowing this to happen?

    As I have pointed out, it has everything to do with double standards when it suits your agenda, that is how it is related to the recall.

    I don't work for the City nor do I have a crew, more Souza spin.

    If you have a beef with Sec of State, take it to the source. Why are you complaining about it in a newspaper blog?

     
  • Always Curious posted at 1:31 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Always Curious Posts: 489

    Can't do your own research Buzz? Easy to do ... (Google).

     
  • Buzzkill posted at 1:21 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Buzzkill Posts: 41

    Mary,

    Isn't your husband a part of the effort to bring hydroplane races here? Yes or no?

     
  • Mary Souza posted at 1:14 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Mary Souza Posts: 792

    Timeless, you and you city hall crew are really busy here today. What does the hydroplane issue, which I have absolutely no involvement with, have to do with the Recall effort?...Nothing. So why are you bringing it up now? To distract from the Secretary of State's actions to change the rules at the very last second and rescue the incumbents?

     
  • meesterbox posted at 1:04 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    chouli - like I said, it is time for our community to respectfully and gracefully move forward and I think you should do the same. Tearing apart what I posted is not respectful or graceful.

     
  • inclined posted at 12:38 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    inclined Posts: 682

    You, editor, are going to summarize? Your condescension comes on like the edge to a strong drink. “Failed”? What if it didn’t? “Asphyxiation”? Yes, there is an impairment, we admit that. The noxious agent is the question. What follows, whatever you bleat out, is patronizing and patently a gas.

    “Learn the answers to these and other important questions, and share those answers with the community. By better understanding what the h.ell happened to us, maybe we can avoid repeating it.”

    This is the problem right here. What the h.ell has been going on has been going on and you are just today coming around to the hope of a “learning stage”, as someone has said, resounds as dismissive, the sitting elite.

     
  • Timeless posted at 12:12 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 479

    Answer the question Mary.

    You have no problem thumbing your nose at 2 (past) PUBLIC VOTES BANNING THE HYDROPLANE RACES, by simply moving them just outside the City limits.

    Why aren't you STANDING UP FOR THE WISHES OF THE CITIZENS OF CDA? Where is the outrage?! Oh yeah, because your husband is on the committee that is bringing the hydroplane races back to CDA Lake, there will be no outrage from you.

    I am not adverse to the hydroplane races returning, particularly. But I am adverse to your double standard when it suits your personal agenda.

     
  • chouli posted at 12:10 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    chouli Posts: 1270

    meesterbox,
    "respectfully and gracefully move forward"... have you read the HBO and your own comments lately?
    is that respectfully and gracefully?

     
  • chouli posted at 12:07 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    chouli Posts: 1270

    it's not in the city limits. period. the city has no jurisdiction. cda can't dictate what happens everywhere else.
    the crowds may come into cda, sure, but since when has the city not welcomed tourists and more people spending money into the city? LOL. if this had nothing to do with mary's husband you folks wouldn't give a rip about it.
    oh, wait, the crowd isn't going to necessarily be those beautiful people that are the only ones welcomed to cda...too many joe-six-packs for your snobby taste? LOL

     
  • Not4sale posted at 12:00 pm on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Not4sale Posts: 145

    This isn't an Editorial, it is a thinly disguised reconciliation request to divert the intentions of his employers dreams of an underground parking lot with no "unsightly" boat ramp, boat traffic and trailers.
    Idaho code says a failed petition drive cannot be brought forward against the same targeted incumbent for 90 days. Rather than contest this outcome, initiate another. The recall organizers failed to educate all of their supporters as to the significance of updated and current registration info, and only have themselves to blame. They should have expected that these slippery incumbents were aware of this potential game-changing requirement. Isn't that really the whole point of the recall--no trust in these self-serving elected officials. Even more ironic is the fact that Kennedy was narrowly elected after some of his opponents votes were voided due to registration issues. It's always about money, and in this case some of it (incremental) is ours.

     
  • Buzzkill posted at 11:47 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Buzzkill Posts: 41

    Mary
    You failed to get the signatures. Period. Your group didn't get it done. Blaming everybody else but yourself is comical. Look in the mirror for once.

     
  • meesterbox posted at 11:39 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    Chouli - you seem upset, but I can understand why. The recall is not moving forward, but it is time for our community to respectfully and gracefully move forward and I think you should do the same.

    The Mayor and Council do allow votes, but they and a majority of our citizens didn't see the value of a public vote on McEuen. You will have your opportunity in 2013, like the rest of us.

     
  • CHSdad posted at 11:31 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    CHSdad Posts: 370

    Chouli, I think you'll find that enough people cared about the racing to ban it. Not enough cared about the recall to have it succeed. Yet here you are ignoring the successful vote yet demanding that the unsuccessful one be overturned.

    Where will the crowds hang out for the racing - not in the city?

     
  • chouli posted at 11:16 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    chouli Posts: 1270

    because no one cares, CHSdad.
    apparently our mayor and council don't allow votes, why should they for your chosen topic? and where exactly are those hydroplane races -- not in the city??

     
  • Timeless posted at 11:15 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 479

    souza:
    The instructions to those wishing to sign your petitions were crystal clear from the beginning," make sure your voter registration is up to date before signing. "

    When so many signers could not comprehend simple instructions and take personal responsibility to make sure their registration was up to date, it concerns me that they didn't truely comprehend the entire McEuen Park proposal and funding, as well.

    See my post below, Mary. I would like to know why you are OK circumventing 2 PUBLIC VOTES from the citizens of CDA, when it suits you and your husbands agenda. Ie: hydroplane races.

     
  • Arsaken posted at 11:14 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Arsaken Posts: 49

    I appreciate meesterbox's post. It's incredibly simple to verify your own information as a registered voter. It takes less than five minutes at the county elections department. It's about taking personal responsibility, in failure as much as you do in success.

    As for launching another recall attempt, the horse is dead. You should stop beating it. The vast majority of people in this community did not support the first attempt, I doubt that would change in the second. Plus it would be fiscally irresponsible and incredibly selfish to put our community through it again.

     
  • CHSdad posted at 11:09 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    CHSdad Posts: 370

    I don't understand why Mary didn't weigh in on the hydroplane vote avoidance.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 11:05 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    ...........and, so......... do it. Redo the recall. Be certain of all facts known to date.

    Then........ after the 2nd recall effort, should the foundational rules get shifted around........ what then?

     
  • chouli posted at 11:02 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    chouli Posts: 1270

    meesterbox. oh puhleezzz..."You shouldn't be playing the blame game Mary, it is very unbecoming. "

    the nastiest vitriole spewed is on HBO... and you are a key player. unbecoming indeed !

     
  • Mark on the Park posted at 10:52 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Mark on the Park Posts: 471

    Off topic alert.

    Why is the poll still posted?

     
  • Always Curious posted at 10:51 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Always Curious Posts: 489

    @meesterbox ... get over yourself - others can have an evaluation of events outside the scope of your knowledge.

    Your penchant for negative labeling and compartmentalizing is well noted, "blame game", how silly and unbecoming of you.

     
  • bluidevl posted at 10:45 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    bluidevl Posts: 140

    Mary Souza- please listen to Brent Regans comments. You now know exactly where we all live who signed and were accepted. You can do it in less than a month this time, they gave you the exact recipe for success. Those whos signatures were rejected can easily be contacted with new registration cards and this time you can have a 0% rejection rate!

     
  • meesterbox posted at 10:23 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    meesterbox Posts: 183

    Mary - Your supporters should take the advice given by Bill McCrory on opencda.com

    "...it is my responsibility as a citizen and a voter to ensure that my voter registration information is up-to-date and that I know what is on it. The simplest way for conscientious voters to do that is to periodically review your voter registration card at the Elections Office, update any necessary information, ask for a photocopy of your card, retain that copy, and refer to it whenever you’re taking an action (e.g., signing a petition for recall, initiative, or referendum) which uses voter registration information for comparison. Most important, update your voter registration card any time information you provided on it changes."

    You shouldn't be playing the blame game Mary, it is very unbecoming.

     
  • Mary Souza posted at 10:01 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Mary Souza Posts: 792

    Here's something you won't read in the Press: The Secretary of State made important "new" interpretations of the laws at two key moments during the Recall process which changed the course of the effort. The first was 11 days into the supposed 75 days for signature gathering. Suddenly the Sec. of State decreed that the Recall had a much shorter time line, even though the Sec. of State had given the full 75 days to the Luna recall group last year.

    The second pivotal "interpretation" of the law came just this past Monday. The Sec. of State decided that any person signing the Recall petition must have their petition city address match their Voter Registration city address exactly. If a person had registered to vote at one address in the city, then later moved to a different city address without updating their voter registration, their signature was to be thrown out. There were well over 200 names in this category.

    The kicker is this: Both the Sec. of State and the County Prosecutor said the voters who moved within the city would still be able to VOTE, just not to sign a petition to get a vote. Does this make any sense to you? We provided the County Prosecutor with case after case of legal reason for allowing the address changes, but the Sec. of State trumped us with his ruling at the very last minute on Monday afternoon.

     
  • mister d posted at 9:04 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    mister d Posts: 1531

    The recall process didn't bring about a vote but it sure demonstrated that quite a few people, who were not nervous about making their names public, agree putting dollars into a park is not a prudent expediture of our money. The four "targets", if they choose to run again (doubtful) will be defeated. Most voters seem to agree they are moving the city in the wrong direction.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 8:59 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    Veeee: I totally agree with you comments.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 8:20 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    PacerToo......... Translated literally it means that the recall got 'suffocated'. That would be the pillow held tightly upon the face of the recall by the CdA Press, the Spokesman-Review and the unethical efforts of the antirecall thugs. They all thrive on asphyxiating their opponents. It is easier than playing fairly.

     
  • ancientemplar posted at 8:10 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    ancientemplar Posts: 1188

    PacerToo, That's liberal claptrap for," I'm intellectually humorous."

     
  • Timeless posted at 8:09 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 479

    Cd1013:

    So, in light of the fact that the citizens of Cda TWICE voted down the idea of bringing the hydroplanes back, what is your opinion of your fearless leader Mary Souza and her husband Rick circumventing that vote by supporting the hydro races to be held just outside the City limits? Just curious.

    It appears that a Public Vote means nothing to the Souzas when it suits their own agenda.

     
  • Veeeee posted at 8:06 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Veeeee Posts: 397

    interesting editorial, but it has a dismissive tone and reads authoritarian. Within our democracy, citizens may continue to puruse what they believe is correct and righteous. And they may continue to question processes and actions around them. And citizens can act. As this political process unveiled, volumes can be written about the emotionally based and sometimes manipulative reactions and responses from all sides. Name calling and threats, misinformation and grandiosity. It was so, so interesting to be so close and personal to the entire process...to witness what we call a "democratic process" at work. Without respectful acceptance of a legal process across all sides, the core personalities of many people became evident...some were in fact respectful...others descended to name calling and threats. No process is over. This editor seeks to dismiss the process and refocus groups towards the future. However, the current situation should continue to be carefully reviewed for lawfulness. It is the right of the citizen to continue to question. Thank you for the opportunity to state my opinion.

     
  • PacerToo posted at 7:59 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    PacerToo Posts: 101

    "a lack of petition signature oxygen leading to political asphyxiation"

    What does that even mean?

     
  • cd1013 posted at 7:28 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    cd1013 Posts: 160

    There is much truth in this editorial. Especially the comments about claiming any victory. There was nothing to be "won". If the petitions would have had the required number of "valid" signatures then we would have voted. That's when you win or lose. This recall drive was (to me) about an advisory vote that people have asked for, including seated council members. An advisory vote is not uncommon in this city, they've happened before. I think in regards to McEuen ALL the people should have a say in it. Not just a few elected "leaders" and considering that the council is divided. This is OUR space!! The price tag is so high and can easily go higher. Finally for those pro McEuen folk who say that a majority want this project because they didn't sign, I say, look at the pro recall numbers and remember this 70% of the electorate didn't even vote in the 2009 election. So do the winners that night claim those (non)votes too?!! I hope that these four "leaders" step back and realize how far the people will go to have their voice heard. Now we wait for 2013. Who knows maybe we get a chance to vote on McEuen before then, I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

     
  • CaiusCosades posted at 7:17 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    CaiusCosades Posts: 380

    Brent that is a very deceptive argument. More people voted to recall the council than to vote them into office for one reason only: during the recall effort there was a lot of fervor and excitement surrounding the event which got people down to sign the petitions.

    When these folks got voted in was during a time of voter apathy and there was no excitement or something to fight for.

    Your argument is totally deceptive which I find is a common thread between the recall folks.

     
  • Timeless posted at 6:38 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Timeless Posts: 479

    Denies:

    (Sigh)

     
  • northidahogirl posted at 6:38 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    northidahogirl Posts: 29

    As DeNiles stated, you are missing the vital point of the Recall! Let the citizens of CDA have a vote when leadership wants to spend millions of OUR dollars!! Drop the whining about personal vendetta...4000+ people are not interested in 2 or 3 people not liking each other...we want to have some say in the way our city is being run.
    I had to chuckle when this editorial stated in regards to the Recall CDA taking legal action, "If they do, they’ll be forcing taxpayers to defend the targeted city officials — an expense we’re certain the recall supporters do not ideologically or fiscally support." Why is this different than spending millions on something that is not going to really and truly benefit the community?
    How many jobs would the new park give to the people? We have so many unemployed that are begging for work! Did these officials ever consider using some of this money to bring some more jobs to the area?
    The recall should serve as a wake-up to these officials to LISTEN to the people who originally elected them and pay their wages. I shudder to think of what they plan to push through in the next year unless they decide to reconsider what the people have shared.
    BTW, I'd love to make the salary of some of the city officials for even 2 years! I could pay off our bills and actually be able to breathe for a change!

     
  • Brent Regan posted at 6:37 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    Brent Regan Posts: 618

    The fact is that a third MORE people signed the Recall Petition (~4,000) than VOTED for the four incumbents (~3,000). 4,000 may be a minority of residents but it is a MAJORITY of those that VOTE. It is unlikely that any of the people who signed the Recall Petition will vote for the incumbents at the next election. It is also possible to have another go at the Recall as the Recall supporters know where 4,000 good signatures live and will have 60 days to find only a few hundred more. Déjà vu all over again.

    Given these realities, Mayor Bloom and company need to rethink their agenda or start working on their resumes. The clock is ticking.

     
  • DeNiles posted at 5:53 am on Wed, Jun 20, 2012.

    DeNiles Posts: 2450

    Here's yet another failure to comprehend the purpose of the recall. For too many years this community has witnessed a tsunami of unrestrained development using a perpetual URD focused less on serious blight and more upon enriching the net worth of those commanding its direction. In the mean time citizens are hurting experiencing a horrific recession. Other public projects are left to rot favoring the select few. State laws get skirted, lies are hatched, finances get buried and hidden. Elections, even recalls get stolen.

    The recall need to revisit sitting these officials was the same need to staunch an open artery. They are bleeding the citizens the same as any heartless, unethical 18th century monarchy. And they will not change. If anything they will be spurred to accelerate their designs knowing full well that their times are limited. The choice is clear. If legal recourse for this recall is unclear, start anew and do better. The recallers now have a system and the experience and more knowledge. They came within 2% of achieving 100% of their goals. That is reason enough for them to regroup and succeed.

     
default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard

Stocks