Note: I am posting this the day before any election results have been posted.
After numerous individuals came forward complaining about divisiveness and/or incivility in Longmont, I figured it was time to create a forum for people to talk about ideas without making it personal.
The "divided" City Council has been unanimous on many issues. This does not make for exciting news reporting. However, it's probably good for the citizens.
Maybe there are other issues that citizens can create unanimity around and pass up to our leaders.
I hope that people will not use this blog for scoring political points, rather I hope this is a place where people can ask genuine questions to produce sound policy for the City of Longmont.
Disclosure: I am biased. I am a registered Democrat. And more than that I have previously been President of Longmont Area Democrats. But my community comes before Party affiliation. I hope that folks from across the spectrum will participate.
Due to the open nature of blogs, I will only suggest some basic ground rules here.
ReplyDelete1) No personal attacks, threats, libel, slander, or anything illegal.
a) Healthy skepticism can be good for getting to a well-thought point.
b) Sarcasm should have no place here unless it is self-deprecating.
2) No trying to blatantly "score political points."
ex.1 "It's obvious that protecting Union Reservoir and keeping a city buffer should be a priority for the City and those that disagree are part of a waning old-guard!"
ex. 2 "It's obvious that continuing the lawsuit against Firestone is an economic boondoggle perpetrated by a no-growth minority!"
- each of these statements are not going to progress debate or build consensus. I would argue that maybe that debate belongs somewhere else.
3) Try bringing up ideas that might have popular support, but need a kick-start or new spin.
ex. 1 FasTracks - Longmont paid for it. Longmont voted for it. How can we make sure Longmont gets it? Our current City Council is unanimous about this, but it is far from a done deal.
4) Tell us who you are. Leave a real name and maybe some contact info if you actually want people to respond.
-Jonathan Singer
singerjonathan@yahoo.com
I feel that the first thing, if we're going to find common ground (which I welcome!) is to throw out the pettiness and childishness of ideas like "let's all wear blue to the swearing-in ceremoney to make a stand." Yes, the Progressive-left has already sent around an email asking Longmont Democrats to do just that. In doing so, they are forcing partisanship in to local politics, where is never has, and never will belong. Aaron Rawlins was absolutely correct in his opinion piece when he noted that partisanship came to Longmont in 2007 when the left took money from a political party. You'll note that none of the Republican candidates have taken money from local Republican organizations, because they understand this is not "red vs. blue" it's "what's best for Longmont." As long as certain groups continue to force a division, by asking residents to wear blue to the swearing in and to council meetings, and by organizing members to do candidate lit drops for certain candidates based on their political affiliation, we are going to have problems. Note that this is ONLY being done by one side. All we can ask is that BOTH sides play by the rules and when that happens, the US vs THEM mentality can give way to partnership.
ReplyDeleteI saw common ground yesterday at the opening of the Greenway extension where *everyone* celebrated this awesome accomplishment, regardless of political affiliation. Elephant and donkey politics have no place on the Longmont City Council. I'm actually going down to 529 Coffman on Monday and convert to "unaffiliated" after I read Ms. Malloy's divisive callout this week for a dress code, for those attending council meetings. Perhaps Longmont can reach common ground if more people join me in abandonding the tired red vs. blue babble.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you best speak to Ms Fissinger about her spewing of sour grapes in future opinion pieces in media articles like that which I saw today in the Longmont Ledger. To place blame upon others for her failure in the election is short sighted. And misguided.
ReplyDeleteAnd as long as she and others known to be affiliated with the far-left leaning faction of the local Dem party in the Longmont community continue to go online in media sources attempting to be anonymous under ids such as "reasonedjudgement" aka Kaye and "peggotty" aka Doug Wray and attempt to repeatedly "slander" other members in this community by name, we won't have common ground.
Nor will we have common ground when you continue to thank members of the local Dem party like Strider Benston while he continues to get up at public invited to be heard and trashes other members of this community, overlooking facts and continues to bring national partisanship into his "speeches". Nor will we have common ground while members such as Shari Malloy continue to complain about newly elected members of our council.
The Longmont voters were not that stupid. It wasn't just about money. It was about who brought what Longmont voters wanted to the table. And Ms Fissinger didn't and neither did Ms Benker, or Mr Bentson.
I'm sure you will consider this to be a personal attack and delete it, but as long as far left leaning members that you align yourselves with keep posting trash about other members in this community, we will never have common ground.
There are far too many "anonymous" persons out there. This community, if it would be one, must not only incorporate "other" points of view, but also try not to judge others for their judgements. Even if a lack of judgement might be "self-" evident. We all breathe the same air, and are all mortal (remember JFK saying that?). There might be valid reasons why this or that church or other organization MAY feel "paranoid;" there could be compelling reasons in some persons' minds to vote AGAINST and not FOR. In this recent city campaign I heard about 97% against, and 3% "for." I will send along further posts, if warranted and allowed, to try to illustrate what I view as some of the sources of voter angst and possible recrimination. The electorate has a rather short memory, as I see it, and in 2004 proved to me that it is generally pretty ill-informed, biased, or affected by what I call "Soundbitedness." The last is in my opinion excusable; the second may be attributed to environmental or cultural factors beyond an individual's immediate and direct control, and the first is largely without merit. Attempts to sway voters are nothing new. At one time candidates offered free beer outside the polling place. This led to a state law closing bars while polls were open. We cannot and should not blame "bloggers" (including here) for election results; we supposedly have free, fair, and independent, RATIONAL minds. So long as the "other" has an agenda and I cannot face my own, I think we might have problems.
ReplyDeleteAnd people are going to want to remain anonymous given the taste in this town for discrediting and slandering the sender of messages.
ReplyDeleteGregory, I have to agree, too many faceless voices. I've heard the phrase 'afraid of repercussions' and have to wonder - with the whole town behind them, what's to fear? Or is it the NEXT time they're worried about?
ReplyDeleteI for one, was plensantly surprised at how well the council worked together last night. I appreciated our new mayor putting the hammer down on the woman who tried to attack Brian and Sean, and I was thankful that the council listened to all the opinions and then voted against the annexation - proving that the new "gang" are beholden to the people of Longmont and our best interests, not the best interests of the big developers, as many have criticized. Kudos to all 7 members and if things continue with the respect shown to each other last night, good things are in store for our community.
ReplyDeleteFear is irrational. I think it accounts for much of our society's attitudinal problem today. The old African proverb stands the test: The dog with the bone is always in danger. And the realization has begun to set in, that "THE [American] PARTY" is over. No more using one's house as an ATM. No more selling a stock for 400% appreciation after mere hours. And, sadly, no more gains for the average wage earner. Actually, on a real (that is, after inflation) basis, 99% of the work force has gone absolutely NOWHERE since 1994. Couple that with the short-memory-challenged fact that the country had a fiscal SURPLUS January 20, 2001. Now too many seem to blame the fireman, not the arsonist. Let me put it as succinctly as one can: THE LAST CITY COUNCIL DID NOT STOP GROWTH IN LONGMONT. And THE NEW CITY COUNCIL CANNOT RESTORE GROWTH IN LONGMONT. I plan to take pains to support my contentions in the near future, right here. I hope some care to read and think, fearful or not. Anonymous or known. Here is a teaser: did the recreation center in the southeast portion of the City "crowd out" other recreation? Or are other forms of recreation still available to us, free of charge or not, indoor and outdoor? We are caught in a huge MACRO problem, and tinkering with microeconomics will AT BEST steal a FEW jobs from some other community. Talk about a Zero-Sum game. Where are the ultimate winners? Hint: they were NOT recently elected to Longmont's City Council. Window dressing, that's all. Economists (I was one) love to make "policy" recommendations. Well, here's mine: when you're in a hole, stop digging! More to come. First I have to re-visit my data.
ReplyDeleteI'm back. If you're the least bit interested in the "bigger picture," I urge you to read the national debt slice, below.
ReplyDeleteI'm experienced and qualified to evaluate a city's or one retail property's economic position and potential. I calculate, using area incomes, that our economic mess translates to a 25% vacancy rate in all "retail" space. That includes restaurants. And that still leaves the "average" household scranbling to pay for health care, transportation, and telecommunications. Building more retail near Union Reservoir, or anywhere else, is just not prudent for the foreseeable future.
We hear a lot (mostly from "Tea Party" advocates) about incurrence of debt at the national level. Well, if preliminary figures are true the current Administration has added about 13% to the debt total. Contrast that to Geo. "W" Bush, who added nearly 77% on his watch. Bill Clinton racked up almost 40%, and Reagan-George H. W. Bush (in twelve years) expanded the national debt by 348%. That's not a typo. Three and a half times. Jimmie Carter's four-year contribution? 46%. Nixon-Ford grew it by 78.5%, while Kennedy-Johnson moved the needle 21.4%. Eisenhower piled on 10.5%. People who live in glass houses should not . . .
Nobody likes being told what to do by an "outsider." Many in Longmont chafe at the influence from afar on the recent election (though I have it from the "other side" that there were plenty who live here who had the sharp knives out for the now-deposed incumbents). Look at a comparable situation. remember all the dust-up over using Native American themes, etc., in sports team nicknames, and so forth? The Washington Redskins, latest conquerors of the Broncos, stood their ground. But there is one Idaho high school with which I am familiar, that gave up its "Savages" moniker to avoid up to $100,000 in legal fees fighting such OUTSIDE organizations as the National Indian Education Association. Now, I AM ANYTHING BUT ANTI-NATIVE. But this shows what can happen when an agenda from a strange ZIP Code collides with a town or school minding its own business . . .
More later.
P. S. How do we send snail mail to anyone "Anonymous?" The USPS has enough trouble with the rest of us!!
Jonathan, your blog idea is futile. When the notion that a Democrat/Republican divide is not part of the politics in Longmont is not honestly recognized, then discussion will go nowhere. Both sides want "what's best for Longmont". They just severely disagree on what that is and how to get there. It all goes back to "conservative" versus "progressive." The Republican Machine, state and regional (and even with "heckuva job, Brownie" weighing in on Huffington Post) entered Longmont's affairs, and the winning side won't admit this. I've read posts where it's alleged that ProgressNow and MoveOn contributed funds to progressives in 2007 through 2009. They did not. And I'm sure that all of the candidates from 2007 onward will swear to that. Yet it keeps being repeated over and over again. This being the case, Jonathan, why are you even trying this?
ReplyDeleteI don't care what one calls her/himself. It's not what one claims to believe, even. It's what one DOES and how one approached genuine injustices and misallocations within this society that really count. Jeffersonian politics probably aligns well with the EXPRESSED "philosophy" of the Independence Institute [I won't listen to Jon Caldara, and neither will his own brother]; Abraham Lincoln was a "Republican." Just what does "progressive" mean, anyway? And what is a "conservative?" The latter label isn't at all the same as it is in the UK, that's certain. What we have is classic and it's been going on in one form or another since Eisenhower left office -- class warfare. And the weapons of choice tend to be those of CLASS destruction: unemployment (in the guise of "labor flexibility"), tax codes favoring the already advantaged, incremental infrastructure placed to help a very limited contituenT [not constituency], political process undermined by short attention spans (see labor flexibility, above), advocacy that employs paper rapiers, scurrilous sound bites, and innovative innuendoes. There are no gentlemen remaining (perhaps on either "side"), and it appears the participating factions believe the field can only be claimed in toto by the "winner." In a nuclear conflict there is no winner. I am convinced the modern USA politics is no different. It's my way or the highway, I will not listen, I'm right, and you'd better get out of my way. Because I'm going to step to the gold-medal podium over your body and anything else that gets in my way. Whilie I'm at it I'm going to insure that the paparazzi know I'm having lunch with this or that clergyman, so that you will be gullible enough to believe he approves of me and my narrow, mean-spirited ways. See? It's a zero-sum game, Lester, and it's going to ruin this country. The high ground is what has gone unclaimed. Is it too late? Watch our youth; why are they so fatalistic?
ReplyDelete