Loveland City Manager Don Williams has done the unthinkable for most senior public servants – he has jumped feet first into the 2009 Loveland election contest and is trying to influence the outcome.
According to several sources, Williams has approached at least one person on the Larimer County Republican Executive Committee to disparage this website and certain candidates seeking elected office in Loveland. Williams has been reported to be cautioning that the “conservative” voting block on Loveland’s council is at risk in this election and that the proprietor of this website is “running” certain candidates for city council.
While the challengers in the upcoming election are a mixed bag between Democrats and Republicans, it is a non-partisan race and should remain such according to Colorado’s constitution. In addition, Williams is playing a dangerous game by trying to manipulate the outcome of a city election through false rumors intended to invite inappropriate if not illegal partisan interference.
The “conservative voting block” Williams is trying to protect would never be recognized as conservatives by a jury of their peers. Support for government subsidized housing, increased sales taxes not to mention a lodging tax along with support for eminent domain for private purposes by some puts them at odds with the very values they claim to hold dear of limited government and taxes.
Cronyism is not a conservative value but instead a default position by politicians who lack either the courage or sophistication to properly direct a city manager who shows contempt for the democratic process by trying to make important decisions behind closed doors.
LovelandPolitics has provided a risk analysis on all candidates relative to the probability they will be vulnerable to McWhinney cronyism once elected. We define a McWhinney Factotum as anyone who will put the interest of McWhinney above other developers, businesses and residents who are not as influential in local politics. We believe the 14th Amendment to the constitution provides “equal treatment” under the law for all citizens and that local officials are not immune from the U.S. constitution.
The McWhinney Scale is simply a projection of each candidate’s future actions based on three independent criteria -
1. For incumbent office holder, how they voted in the past
2. For everyone, who is sponsoring their candidacy
3. Statements they have made to voters regarding their leanings and views of previous votes.
Every candidate in red is there because of at least one of the previous three criteria came to our attention. Some were interviewed by LovelandPolitics while others were not.
We are not making any value judgment regarding the candidates in green (independent) other than the fact they are not likely to be influenced in their decisions by McWhinney in secret meetings. Please take your responsibility to vote very seriously and call every candidate (phone numbers are provided by LovelandPolitics in a link to the story) to determine who will best represent your views in city hall and act in the interest of all of Loveland.
Any comments?
I am wondering if LovelandPolitics is willing to disclose contacts you have had with the candidates? Lots of information on this website appears to be personal in nature or private and in one case information that person running for office hasn’t yet decided to release to the community. At least the Reporter-Herald first confirms the information and whether the candidate is ready to release it before publishing. Who gave you permission to publish all these things here and who are you accountable to anyway?
I agree this will be an interesting election……..news flash for me that so many are in the red especially when a couple of those characters told me they were voting more independent then you guys say……I know Dave was pushing Teri to run but do you know who is backing Bob Snyder? Does he have a credible connection to the guys who roll upside down and let Chad and Troy scratch their bellies like the chamaber or what not……?
We reviewed the nomination petition signatures and interviewed a number of the candidates we could reach. In addition, LovelandPolitics readers emailed the various comments the candidates made in various community settings – Rotary, Hunter’s Run HOA candidate greet last Saturday, Corn Roast Festival, Loveland 912 meetings and other community events where they have been interacting with the voters.
In all we have gathered considerable information and the conclusions are based on the aggregate of that information and not any single source.
If there is an interest we can post a pdf file of every candidate’s petition (with the signatures attached) for your review to see who nominated them.
In the case of Mr. Snyder, he was interviewed early on, is supported by a number of McWhinney subsidy apologists in the Chamber and has evaded answering specific questions by voters regarding his views on the lodging tax, McWhinney obligations to repair the I-25 and 34 interchange and other important community issues.
Thanks for all that you do. I really didn’t even know the names of who is running until a friend told me to look for the information here.
I don’t really understand about all the mcwhiney stuff but can see it is bad if people who support them are trying to hide the fact they know them.
I want to give a shout out to my buddy Brad who told me to checkout this page! Hey Brad I am even posting something!
Take care everyone
OK, what is the problem with this picture? The city can’t pave roads, keep police on salary or even mow the parks when they need to and Dave Clark is running for Mayor?
In case anyone forgot, Walt Skowron predicted this down turn in the economy and warned his fellow councilors many times. Mr. Clark even responded by telling Walt to “stop discouraging the community.”
Only Walt stood tall and refused to allow the city to pass more subsidies for failing businesses and even stopped the McWhinney bailout on I-25/34 thing by persuading Dave Clark to withdraw his support in private. When Dave agreed he called Chad and told them they didn’t have the votes.
Placing Walt in your “McWhinney Factotum” is just wrong and biased. He alone stood against McWhinney and warned everyone what would happen but he had to work behind the scenes because that us how things get done down there. You need to move Walt to the right of Cecil Gutierrez because Walt is the true independent.
He only voted for McWhinney things when city taxdollars are not at risk.
I am voting for Walt and so is my entire family. He is the only Republican running for Mayor who stood tall and did the right thing. You need to correct your bias McWhinney scale thing.
Anyway please report the truth!
Why is Glenn R. to the right of Daryle on the McWhinney scale? I thought Daryle was pretty independent and not really running with David Clark and the McWhinney pack?
Thanks for this post, and for reminding everyone here that partisanship has no place in town politics.
“The “conservative voting block” Williams is trying to protect would never be recognized as conservatives by a jury of their peers. Support for government subsidized housing, increased sales taxes not to mention a lodging tax along with support for eminent domain for private purposes by some puts them at odds with the very values they claim to hold dear of limited government and taxes.”
True enough. So to raise terms like “conservative” or “liberal” is silly. City government already is “limited government,” that’s part of why it’s so hard. Some might want to make it easy for voters by putting on national labels and the right color-coded swag, yet in the end, this election will not be about national divisions, but about the candidates with the best LOCAL solutions.
I find it ironic that LovelandPolitics.com suggests on their homepage that they are a ‘non-partisan, not for profit, news website reporting on Loveland, Colorado.’ While I often find some of the humor on this site entertaining, I am left to wonder if the heading on the homepage is also intended to be humorous because information presented here is clearly not ‘non-partisan’ or ‘news.’ By definition, news is information about events or developments that is based on fact. After reading the ‘reporting’ on this website regarding the upcoming local election, it has become clear to me that this site is not an objective source of factual information but is instead more propaganda intended to sway voters with emotionally charged rhetoric.
Confused and concerned? We should be. Here are a few observations on the Lovelandpolitics.com ‘reporting’ of the election and of their unconditional support of Cecil Gutierrez:
1. The proposed McWhinney scale, while entertaining, is simply another clear attempt to sway voters towards the candidate clearly supported by Lovelandpolitics.com, their friend, Mr. Gutierrez. While they claim for him and Grewal to be independent, the simple fact is that both of them have limited voting history on McWhinney matters. Grewal is clearly new to Loveland politics and Guitierrez has only been on Council for 2 years. The majority of McWhinney related issues going to Council vote have occurred before his time.
2. The comment that “Three of the four, David Clark, Walt Skowron and to a lesser extent Glenn Rousey have long histories of supporting McWhinney’s every demand of Loveland’s City Council” is a blatant lie. Do your research, Mr. Administrator and I suspect that you will find that Skowron and the others did not unconditionally vote in favor of all McWhinney matters appearing in front of Council. Furthermore, to state that Guitierrez is “the only candidate with elected office experience who doesn’t have a history of rubber stamping McWhinney requests” is an attempt to emotionally manipulate voters to support your friend, Mr. Gutierrez. While I too have issues with many of the McWhinney dealings with the city, Skowron is not a ‘McWhinneycrat’ as you suggest. He has been one of the very few on Council over the past 8 years has been objective with his voting while considering issues that are critical to Loveland’s long term viability including transportation and budgetary matters.
3. The administrators of LovelandPolitics.com have demonstrated their lack of credibility by speculating in the blog responses to “Gutierrez Running for Mayor” that Rousey has “taken rides on their mega yacht in Mexico, ate wonderful meals at their invitation or received any other kind of gift or other type of gratuity for (himself) or a family member.” If indeed he has not accepted such gifts as I suspect he has not, to suggest that he has can be considered defamation of character and slander in addition to being a biased manipulation of voters who consider ‘information’ presented on this site when casting their vote for Mayor.
4. The attempts by Lovelandpolitics.com to discredit Councilman Skowron for his support of the lodging tax are biased and extreme. Their homepage article clearly demonstrates their lack of credibility as an objective source of Loveland news. Lodging taxes are a common way to provide revenue for projects supported by the community that benefit those in the community and those who visit it without expecting ratepayers to pay more. This becomes especially important during the period of economic uncertainty that we are experiencing today. Mr. Administrator, your twisted interpretation of Section 3.24.396 is clearly geared to discredit candidates who supported its merits and voted for its inclusion on the November Ballot. Remember, this council vote doesn’t put the tax into law; it simply gives you and other voters the opportunity to become educated on the matter and decide for yourselves if this is a good tax for the community. Is the article fact? No. Is it creative writing? Perhaps. Could it be rhetoric intended to manipulate voters and steer voters away from one candidate and to another? You be the judge.
5. The Lovelandpolitics.com Administrator comment in the “Gutierrez Running for Mayor” blog that “none of the three (McWhinneycrats) has demonstrated an ability to lead” is an uneducated, misleading and biased statement. I urge voters to compare the leadership, commitment and public service of the other three current Council members running for Mayor. They will discover that Gutierrez does not lead the pack with those virtues. The objective and long term service in Council, Planning Commission, city committees and Chamber of Commerce by Councilman Skowron undeniably holds that claim.
While Gutierrez appears to be a nice and competent Council member, it is important for voters to remember that similar to Sarah Palin resigning as Governor of Alaska and Don Marostica vacating his seat in the Colorado legislature, Gutierrez has also failed to fulfill the responsibility and commitment to the term (four years) that he accepted when he was elected two years ago. We should expect and demand commitment and responsibility from our leaders. But instead of being committed to his Council responsibility, he is now unnecessarily costing the city over $10,000 to hold a special election for his Council seat because he is leaving mid-term to run for Mayor. If he truly respected his office and constituents, he would fulfill the obligation to his oath, complete his term and then consider an opportunity for the Mayoral seat. Perhaps then voters and Lovelandpolitics.com would know more about Gutierrez, have a better idea of what he truly represents and better understand his objectivity in representing the citizens of Loveland in an independent manner.
Lovelandpolitics.com: be part of the solution and not the problem. Enough of the rhetoric. It is pretty rich to accuse Don Williams of trying to influence the outcome of the election when your motives are clearly no different. Present objective and non-biased information or remove the claim on your homepage that you are a ‘non-partisan, not for profit, news website reporting on Loveland, Colorado.’ As I have clearly demonstrated, that is a false statement on many counts.
According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary “nonpartisan” means “without party affiliation.” If the information i have is correct (which i am not certain) the ‘independents’ on the McWhinney Scale’ are from three party designations – republicans, democrats and undeclared.
Michael maybe you need to do more reading and less writing since you seem to be very angry at LovelandPolitics over your own misunderstanding of the word ‘nonpartisan.’
Michael –
Accusations of Slander -
You falsely stated above that this website accused Mayoral candidate Rousey of taking gifts from McWhinney and also stated, “….to suggest that he has can be considered defamation of character and slander……”
Well, you intentionally misquoted the blog posting (that anyone can look-up under Gutierrez Running For Mayor) that simply said the council excluded itself from a popularly passed statewide ethics initiative requiring local politicians to report such gifts therefore it is impossible to know what gifts Rousey may have or not taken from McWhinney at least from the public record.
Lodging Tax -
Walt Skowron is promoting the lodging tax and was a primary architect of the plan. The fact he has been attending conservative and Republican gatherings lately clothed in the suit of an anti-tax crusader is more than ironic and clearly newsworthy. Our reporting this fact is not intended as a comment for or against the lodging tax but instead pointing out the irony of his campaign strategy of being the anti-tax guy while the only tax on the ballot is his.
Skowron On McWhinney -
For years Walt Skowron would take a principled stand on a number of important financial issues and was the ONLY councilor to have warned his colleagues of the impending recession and urged financial restraint before 2007.
When is comes to McWhinney, Skowron abandons reason and does vote for their every whim and fancy brought before the council.
It was particularly painful for many in Loveland to see Skowron, an elected official, demean his office by begging McWhinney in a public discussion “can’t you give us a little more time” on a general policy decision to which McWhinney should have no legal standing over any other resident who lives in Loveland.
Ignoring the public and attempting to deny public comment, the McWhinneycrats sat high on the council dais as Chad McWhinney argued with councilors not favoring a change as if he were a member of the council. Chad McWhinney even gave FALSE information to council to influence their vote that staff was afraid to correct in public.
Michael, this would be front page news in most any other city in the country. No other source has documented more council actions and deals with McWhinney than LovelandPolitics.
Financial Health of Centerra -
The current credit risk on the $112,000,000 public debt created by McWhinney for Loveland’s Centerra is exposed to changing interest rates backed by derivatives in an interest swap agreement. The counter-party to the agreement, RBC, is rated by Standard & Poor’s as “Credit Watch Negative.”
Walt Skowron can play tough guy with disabled veterans’ and girl scouts troops looking for the city’s support all day long to show how he is a good custodian of our tax dollars.
However, these pale in comparison with the financial risks of Centerra and the fact McWhinney already spent much of the $112,000,000 to benefit their own properties instead of on real public improvements.
Do you know even one taxpayer in Loveland who believes the MotorPlex or Centerra monument signs on the I-25 are the taxpayer’s responsibility?
Apparently, Walt Skowron does as he voted to allow more public debt at the taxpayer’s expense to build those signs when he approved Centerra’s annual budget.
Next time, try arguing against real facts instead of setting-up straw-man arguments your buddies have given you. You sound eerily similar to defenders of Bernie Madoff or other charlatans by attacking the source of the news instead of responding to the facts that have been reported.
Lovelandpolitics.com is like The Reporter-Herald and every other so-called news source – they have an axe to grind. Keep that in mind when posts are made here under the guide of journalism, professional or otherwise.
Chris, comparing this website to the Reporter-Herald is not fair. At least here they attempt to report local politics as it is, and come up with some amazing scoops for a shoestring budget. The R-H has far more money, full-time staff, and until recently a monopoly on what local goings on would be reported at all. Yet, the R-H still managed to miss important stories that were only grudgingly reported after this site first broke the news. That’s not like every other news source.
I concur with David’s last post While it’s clear that this site’s reporter has strong opinions on many of the issues presented, at the same time this site has been the ONLY reliable and in depth source of information about what has happened at City Hall, and how it affects me as a citizen. This site frequently “scoops” the print media; and even more importantly, they have presented more than just the “Press Release” spin from the self-anointed elite, that the local papers have been only too happy to regurgitate.
In fact, the reason I quit subscribing to the local daily was because they only report what their friends in high places have to say. As if ultra rich land speculators and developers, and the puppets who feed them at the public trough, are the only people who matter.
If you depended on the local print media, you’d never know that regular citizens had even been at the Council podium to oppose yet another McWhinney giveaway, for instance…let alone why. And the papers certainly won’t dig into any of the issues by themselves… they treat them as if they’re nonexistent. They also back without any analysis, nearly every proposed tax increase, esp. if the Chamber of Commerce or related groups are behind it – anything that benefits their limited circle of croneys.
In the face of that, I can easily accept this site’s occasional mixing of opinion with facts… in part because they provide lots of the latter, and in part because I recognize the difference between the one and the other.
This site is what it is. After almost 8 years serving as a member of the city council and now running for the office of mayor, I have never been contacted by anyone connected to this blog.
They don’t need to contact you Rousey, you provide them with all the information they need to know by your persistent posting on this site.
Hello everyone,
Looks like I struck a nerve!! A few comments:
First, ‘CamTheRam’s Keeper, thank you for the official definition of non-partisan! I was hoping that I wouldn’t have to spell it out but it appears I must. If you look at the McWhinney scale, it is quite clear that the ‘Administrator’ has labeled those with non-liberal viewpoints as extreme McWhinney supporters. While in some cases this may be true, it is misleading to suggest that Gutierrez is independent when we don’t have 8 years of his voting history to look at. Remember, he hasn’t even finished 1 term on Council!
Thanks ‘Administrator’ for your responses. In response to your first point, I simply pointed out that suggesting that Rousey accepted those gifts is speculation and not appropriate for a ‘news’ site. It would have been more appropriate to discuss the state wide ethics initiative and state how each councilor voted on the matter. It is clear to me that this website favors one candidate over the rest.
Skowron pushed for the tax to be on the ballot for you, me and every other voter in Loveland to decide on. Don’t make it into a bigger issue than it is, but if you must: most communities have lodging tax which provide for community initiatives without sending the bill to citizens. Some communities even have lodging taxes greater than 10%, but obviously that is an unreasonable figure. Remember that in the next few years our city budget will be under immense pressure and some programs will need to be minimized or cut because of declining revenues to the City through traditional means like sales tax. I don’t think that Skowron is pro-tax, I think he is trying to identify common methods used by many communities to supplement the city budget, which is especially important during periods of tough economic conditions. While yes, you have identified an irony but if you think it is newsworthy to make that observation than it is certainly newsworthy to tell the whole story to ensure you are not misleading your readers.
I think that Councilman Skowron is perhaps the most conservative with taxpayer’s money on council. Yes, you are correct that he urged financial restraint regarding the impending recession. He is the one who had to convince council that we do not ‘live on an island’ (meaning that Loveland is not immune to macro economic conditions). Many others on council have since changed their tune. He also worked hard with the finance committee to get a better rate of return on the City’s reserves. These are the newsworthy stories.
But back to McWhinney, he does not vote for every whim and fancy brought to council; that is simply untrue. Numerous times he has challenged McWhinney and fellow councilors on McWhinney matters. For one, have we forgotten about the trolley debacle?
It is rarely a disservice to the public to ask for more information or more time on ANY issue. More time and discussion gives the Council time to identify gaps in information and verify information presented to them by applicants and citizens to make the most informed decisions. Undoubtedly, McWhinney has influenced this council. McWhinney may very well have presented false information to council. Skowron or any other councilor should not be blamed for that; he should be praised for urging council to not rush into a vote. To say that Skowron has unconditionally supported McWhinney is untrue and is misleading to readers to suggest so.
You are right, this should be front page news but it should also be objective and honest without the spin.
To blame him or anyone else with the financial health of Centerra is laughable. He did more to prepare council and the city for the economic down turn than any other Councilor. If you want to bring up signs on I-25, don’t forget about his fight against the outlet mall signs that were in direct violation of sign code. He is not the biased McWhinneycrat you make him out to be. You seem to pick out tidbits that tell your story but not the whole story.
Facts? I am certain my posts are more factual than much of the slant presented on this website. Similar to defenders of Bernie Madoff??? Come on, that crack says it all. Just because someone disagrees with your ‘news’ you need to push tabloid-style attacks? It does wonders for your credibility. Chris is right, Lovelandpolitics.com does indeed seem to have an axe to grind.
Michael, if you search the name Skowron on the LovelandPolitics.com homepage you will get links to 44 articles or blog postings going back 6 years. Contrary to your assertion, they are not negative and “bias” or “lies” but instead generally positive or neutral and always factual.
The LovelandPolitics.com homepage is the news page where articles detailing facts about Loveland politics and council meetings are reported by various people while the blog is the opinion zone for the publisher.
No other news outlet has published more quotes, video clips or pictures of Walt Skowron and his colleagues on Loveland’s City Council than this website.
We never use canned quotes from press releases or let any candidate or office holder influence our coverage or use publicity shots when reporting on a meeting. Instead, we use real quotes, real photographs (whether flattering or not) and often include actual video clips of the meetings. Instead of repeating city official’s descriptions of official documents or letters to the city we scan them and link the original document to our story so our readers can have the same access to the facts as we do.
If you reference the April 16, 2008 article on surety bonds, the November 2006 article on the land annexation of 97 acres using CEF funds or the story last April about I/25&34 interchange debate you will find Councilman Skowron is well documented as opposing the McWhinney majority on those specific votes and being quoted in his opposition by LovelandPolitics accurately and fairly.
LovelandPolitics.com broke the story about the council’s potentially illegal and secret meetings with McWhinney to negotiate the “Flex URA” plan, we broke the news the “Fortune 500” company coming to the area was really Agrium which is not a Fortune 500 company among many other stories to long to list here.
Now prepare yourself because here is the “bias” editorial comments that seem to get you so upset.
We liked Councilman Walt Skowron for a longtime. He often asks great questions, probes the necessity of new spending proposals and has articulated great reasons why the council shouldn’t do things we thought were dumb as well.
Here is the problem. He almost always follows-up his cantankerous comments with a YES vote. So we judge him not by his comments alone but the votes he casts after making those comments. The next Mayor of Loveland should not only be able to deliver a good rational for or against any vote but also be able to follow the rhetoric with the actual vote.
Walt Skowron is like having a great football player on the field who regularly forgets what direction he was running after catching the ball. After articulating all the reasons he is going to vote against or for something he votes the opposite. This is a phenomenon even his colleagues on council have been unable to resolve.
Regarding the lodging tax you are off the reservation. Because the law requires voter approval doesn’t give him a pass by saying he only submitted it to the voters for approval. He is unequivocally on the record advocating for the tax which he said he would only support at the higher rate than the 3% that was finally adopted by council. As always, he voted in favor of putting the 3% proposal after saying he could not since the tax wasn’t high enough.
We will provide an opinion on the lodging tax in a future blog posting.
Thanks for your comments.
Oh my God will you guys please stop! It is obvious that Walt Skowron is angry about his placement on your “McWhinney scale” thing.
Michael (if that is who you really are) I only know what my council looks like because lp.com. 20 year old photos in the Herald of these young men are a joke. Why can’t they hire a photographer more than once every 4 years.
I don’t get cable anymore and rely on you guys to inform me on city politics (which I don’t have time for anyway).
Can I just apologize for Michael and stop this. You guys are great and everyone in loveland knows where to get our political news.
Something Michael may not know was Walt voting in 2004 for eminent domain against the Heins out on south taft ave. Read the book ‘A Little Pink House’ about the Kelo Vs. New London case to get the whole scoop.
I donate to the CONSERVATIVE non-profit that helped the poor nurse (Susan Kelo) fighting to save her house. If Walt Skowron is conservative Republican than I must be Donald Trump. Go lp.com go!
Michael’s so concerned about Cecil Gutierrez having time left on his term for City Council, I sure hope he opposed John McCain and Barak Obama for each being willing to step up to a higher office while they had time remaining on their terms! John McCain’s current term goes through 2010. Obama’s was only elected to the US Senate in 2005. Michael must have been a Nader supporter?
The city NEEDS Cecil’s leadership. The mayor’s position should be filled by one of Gutierrez’s talents.
I thought about it some more and realize Michael could be Don Williams.
Michael you posted above, “If you look at the McWhinney scale, it is quite clear that the ‘Administrator’ has labeled those with non-liberal viewpoints as extreme McWhinney supporters.”
The “independents” on the McWhinney scale include Carl Fritz, who is a conservative and friend of Councilman Klassen and Adam Koniecki who is a also a conservative. Both are registered Republicans then why aren’t they as you say labeled, “extreme McWhinney supporters”?
Despite what you claim NONE of those guys who are extreme McWhinney supporters are really Republicans. Dave Clark, Walt Skowron and Glenn Rousey all support higher taxes and more government solutions to life’s little problems.
Look at subsidized government housing (Darcy Mclure who runs Loveland’s Welfare Welcome Wagon), immigration, taxes (RTA and lodging) and lots of stuff these guys are behind which are the agenda of liberal democrats. McWhinney is a new government in Loveland now and according to this site has gotten itself into over $100 million in debt. Now Michael, tell me again how these guys are “conservatives.” More quasi-government agencies and $100 million in new debt taxpayers need to cover. Sounds like they support more government and more taxes not less.
Loveland voters finally have a chance to throw the little dictator Don Williams off the his power throne that Chad McWhinney put him on and Dave Clark and the others salute. If Dave Clark is gone and Don Williams too maybe the council can get back to the business of representing citizens again and not the McWhinney brothers’ ambition to take all our money for themselves.
CamTheRam, Darcy and Administrator,
I assure you that I am Michael, a name given to me by my parents, and I personally wrote everything in my posts without the input of ANYONE. I am not on council, not a developer, don’t work for the city and am certainly not Don Williams. (I just wish I made his income.) I write these comments because I was raised in this town and care deeply about it. I have seen other parts of the country and the world and no place is home to me like Loveland is. I suspect that most people who take the time to read about local politics in papers and websites like this care too and I just want to be sure that what is being presented as factual is indeed factual. Nothing wrong with asking these questions, whether you agree with me or disagree with me I think everyone gains something from these blog postings.
I have no idea how any of the Councilors feel about the ‘McWhinney scale’ and that isn’t the point. I just know how I feel: it’s entertaining but biased.
And let’s face it, those on council deal with hundreds of matters while on serving their terms. I am not here to debate how someone voted on something in 2004; that isn’t the point either. What is important is that we learn the candidates true motivations, beliefs and affiliations. And while I think McWhinney has certainly successfully negotiated some sweetheart deals for him with council, I don’t think it is truthful to label Skowron as being affiliated with them.
I am thankful there are so many people interested in running for Mayor and Council. That isn’t always the case. I am just trying to bring up comments and points contained here about the candidates that I think contain more opinion than fact.
Regardless of your opinions and political persuasions, it seems to me that all of us have questions and thoughts about candidates that we would like to hear more of. Perhaps with the help of this site and the RH we can organize our own town hall meeting; a REAL town hall meeting where all Mayoral candidates (if interested) show up to a public meeting where people can freely ask questions to the candidates that aren’t pre filtered. That way we can all see a real debate. And if any of the candidates don’t show up, that will tell us something about them too.
Cam, you may not know the candidates as well as you think you do. I am pretty certain that Clark and Skowron do not support big taxes or big government.
And Eric, not that it is relevant or frankly any of your business, you are correct: I did not support McCain or Obama.
Thanks everyone for your comments.
Michael, you have a great idea regarding the town hall meeting. I would be game for helping to organize that. Administrator, any thoughts?
Michael et al,
The more mayoral candidate debates, the better.
Good idea.
I do, Michael, take issue with the point you raise about Cecil Gutierriz not filling out his full council term if elected mayor.
(by way of full disclosure, i support cecil’s election).
Your comparisons are a stretch. Sarah Palin resigned to do something else; not clear exactly what. Don Marostica gave up his state House seat, in my opininion, because he saw the handwritting on the wall or just wanted to try something else. He was under heavy attack from his own party.
Cecil sees this year’s mayoral election as an opportunity to really address the overridding issue of how Loveland is governed. Why not wait two years, you say? That opportunity may not be available in 2011.
If Cecil wins, there will indeed be a special election. Those are the rules we have, as a community, agreed to play by.
There are other ways to approach such situations: an appointment to fill out the term, a resign-to-run provision, etc. The subject is worth discussing — the way it now stands (by law) does come with a cost. Work to change the law if you don’t like it, but don’t use it against a candidate who is certainly not Sarah Palin or Don Marostica.
I voted for Cecil as Ward 1 council member two years ago. Because I agree with him on the issues, his attempt to provide another point of view and the courage to stand up for his beliefs; his character. That he’s running for mayor doesn’t make me think he’s not fulfilling his obligation as my elected representative. I see it as a way to expand it.
One last point. This is a great forum for debate. More Loveland residents should take advantage of it. The opinions I expressed are mine, and I attach my name to them. I wish more folks would do the same.
What’s to fear, really?
That someone doesn’t agree? That’s okay.
Right?
I sure hope so; that we haven’t lost the ability in America and Loveland to agreeably disagree.
And stand by our opinions by sharing who we are.
Tony Benjamin,
Loveland
I still think Daryle Klassen belongs a little more to the center on your scale but other than that its fine by me.
As for good old Walt Skowron, he lost me when he voted for the fake urban blight declaration of productive farm land. The council even certified it as a “menace” to the community to help McWhinney – ha!
My word is my bond. These people who tell you the end justifies the means doesn’t cut it with this old Sailor. Walt was talkin a good game that night then he just rolled over voted for the fraud. So Administrator is right about what he said.
It takes a lot of nerve to ask the council to lie with you and pretend your ag acres are blight just to get all kinds of federal help and gets you back most of your future taxes. Folks in Johnstown have to deal with honest officials who take their oath to office more serious.
I would love to ask Walt what part of that land was a menace to the community. Ag land feeds everyone and calling it a menace just to help Chad isn’t right
, look at that story you all got up there on it tying to link it but don’t know how
http://www.lovelandpolitics.com/flexmeeting4.html
Michael, yes I agree it is a great idea and will support such a forum. I was very disappointed last election when the League of Women Voters censored the candidates by telling them they could not discuss their opponent’s records or actions.
We suggested using the Rialto Theater some time ago. The Reporter-Herald is already now hosting a Mayor’s debate so I am afraid it is too late for that venue even though I believe they are selling tickets and controlling who can attend.
If you want to organize a debate for all the candidates where members of the public can ask questions, we will pay for the rent of the Rialto Theater.
I would suggest Amy Oliver (KFKA Talk Show) as a moderator. I would also request that the forum be fair and equal to all candidates, open and free for the public to attend and cover a variety of topics so the public can hear the candidates discuss lots of city related issues.
The idea is an open discussion for every candidate and only questions from the public with no sermons.
This I will gladly co-sponsor and pay for the theater rental.
Long time to talk – how is everyone?
I think you are all missing the point. David Clark has McWhinney’s endorsement and money. They and the chamber are backing him 100% so the winner (the guy with money) has already been chosen.
Unless Mssrs. Skowron, Rousey or Gutierres spend $10 to $20 thousand of their own money the Mayoral election was already decided in the McWhinney board room on Rocky Mountain Ave four months back
All this chatter is just academic.
Why not have a pair of moderators, the rightwing Amy Oliver and the leftwing David Sirota?
Regarding the debate, tickets are free and available to anyone who asks. I went in yesterday morning and asked for and received 4 tickets for me and my family. No identification required, no payment asked for. I know the RH isn’t liked much on this forum, but this event is pretty open to anyone wishing to attend.
Hello Walter,
Well, we’ll see.
I hear you when you say money talks. Way too much, escpecially in a time when getting hard information is sparse and investigative reporting is faltering.
You have a lot of history on your side, for sure.
However.
Every so often, something different happens.
Which makes the chatter not academic at all.
I think the mayoral election is more wide open than the way you frame it. There are real choices between the candidates.
You think the outcome is already decided. I think there’s a chance that the voters won’t buy into that, and set new course for Loveland.
The stakes are pretty high. As I said, we shall see.
Regards,
Tony Benjamin
Thank you Walter and Tony for adding to this discussion. I am also not convinced of Walter’s conclusion that the McWhinney’s and the Chamber can push Dave Clarke into the Mayor’s seat.
Campaign contributions are limited to only $100 per person and prohibited for corporations. Although we’ve seen in previous elections that every extended member of the McWhinney family donates to political campaigns, and the McWhinney company is not above endorsing candidates and encouraging employees to make the same donations.
This is a different city election than previous years when a few big business and development interests could drop thousands of dollars for their annointed candidates. Dave Clarke may have duplicated Gene Pielin’s campaign yard signs, but he’s not likley to get bankrolled like the old days.
I was just wondering if you could find out where all the money is coming from for all the candidates. I heard today that the Bohemian Foundation, which I believe is from Ft. Collins, is a primary funding entity for the democrats on the ticket. I also heard that the democratic party is actively involved in this election. I areally though our local politics was supposed to be non-partisan.
Having once been a part of it all, I do understand the way council members become “educated” ( can we say brainwashed).The city is drunk on sales tax revenue and it is hard habit to quick. Our Community development director is at best just a slick willie who looks good in a suit.
i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I have found It absolutely helpful and it has aided me out loads. Sorry to hear we must decide between inheritance conservatives and wacky Democrats like Trenary in most Wards. Cecil is leading us off a financial cliff many time worse than 402 or vNet.
Maybe this Fogle guy should use his influence to get Bill to return our money and he would be a hero since the million dollars he pays back could be used to jump start ACE.
What to do?