By Steve Huntsman
Via Weber Sentinel News
Friday, 01 September 2006
Don’t skip breakfast before you open your new property tax notice. If you live in Weber County you’re about to have your heart skip a beat when you see the increases. Then say to yourself, “This is OK, I voted for these people and bonds. Didn’t I support the school bond increase? And didn’t I vote for the new consolidated 911 dispatch last year?”
As you unsteadily gather yourself off the floor you might say; “But wait a minute. The mayor I voted for said he was a conservative who would hold the budget. I was told the school bond tax, for the most part, was to remain constant because of older bonds simultaneously expiring. I was told my local city municipal tax was supposed to go down as a county-wide consolidated 911 dispatch tax went up.”
Well, guess what? We, the good citizens of Weber County, have just traded another pound of flesh, when no pound was to be taken, for services we already had. If our governing bodies believe we, the people, have less than a four-week-old memory, and like a wayward child, a good cuff will send us back into line and back into the voting trough, then I have news for them.
Please understand, they might be dealing with objective thinkers in Weber County who ‘do not agree’ with the deception. King George III once said about the colonizers in America, “A traitor is everyone who does not agree with me.” To this I cry, well then call me a traitor, and let’s make the most of it, because I, for one, ‘do not agree’ with my new property tax notice.
Most Weber County citizens now see our local legislators have caught the same disease as the ones we keep sending back to Washington. The symptoms of this contagious disease are rather easy to spot including: acting like a charitable king in order to maintain office; and accomplishing a goal by spending the public treasury, regardless of any budget or constraint, while duplicitously informing the people that ‘in truth’ they are lowering our taxes.
When our local legislators act this way with the public funds, they mirror the acts of a monarchal king in his stewardship. The legislator ruler knows that like King Louis XVI of France, if he does not please the mob, then he might get an all expense paid trip to Madame Guillotine in the next election.
“If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace,”-Samuel Adams
I’m upset at what has happened this year with our property taxes. I refer to the situation we are in as ‘taxation with false representation’ for two reasons.
First, the local school board asked us to vote to for a $95.3 million dollar school bond – nothing wrong with that, except they snuck the new tax through during a primary election – mainly a Republican primary – with a perceived low voter turnout.
Out of the 210,000 people who live in Weber County, only 6,000 (or less than 3 percent) of the entire county voted. In reality, all it took during this primary election to approve this bond was for about 1 percent of the population, or for simply all the local school teachers and their spouses to take five minutes out of their three month summer vacations and go to the voting trough. Now 210,000 residents now have higher taxes.
Second, we were sold in the newspapers that the multiple 911 dispatch centers would combine into one central dispatch center.
We were sold that voter approval would reduce the total tax burden. If we approved the new 911 center tax, the municipalities would further reduce their tax burden and we would all save money. Instead, in North Ogden and in several of the communities, the city tax level this year did the opposite — it increased.
When questioned about this, North Ogden Finance Director Debbie Cardenas openly admits, “Sure we reduced the tax for the 911 center, but we needed more funds for other things, so we were forced to increase our portion.”
I live in North Ogden and the new 911 tax on my home went from $0 to $88, while the city tax portion went from $667 to $722. As you can see, in reality there was no decrease here, only a total tax increase. The 911 tax was added as other city taxes increased.
Residents across the county are upset by this type of financial mismanagement being carried out by governing bodies. How long will we continue to believe the stories we are told when we vote?
I understand that my city utility bill is also now increasing from near $70 a month to $90 a month, but I’m receiving no new services. The facts are that the county is giving the cities more money this year than last. The cities are also receiving new tax windfalls as a direct result of the increased revenues on electricity and natural gas costs. Now some of our cities are even raising their portion of the property tax on top of the county certified rates.
Fortunately for you, the reader, these tax issues are political ones. But they do require your action in order change future outcomes. Tricking the public into raising these taxes, while telling us they were not raised, reminds me of the Chinese proverb. “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.”
When a local legislator (a mayor, city council member or school board) acts like a king and degenerates by deception, partially for the sake of maintaining their power, and they do this by opening the public treasury, then methinks it’s time for them to forfeit their rights of leadership. Thank goodness we still can vote and have long-term memories in Weber County.
Steve Huntsman is a member of the Weber Sentinel News editorial board, serves a city councilman for the City of North Ogden and is an occasional contributor to Weber County Forum.
26 comments:
I'm glad that you have one republican that will stand up for the truth. There has been so much of telling less than the truth that I hate to calling it lying, but lets call it what it really is a big fat lie when they don't tell us the truth. I think that it is time to change and vote democrat so that we can clean up this culture of coruption. I think that what I have seen Rep. Hansen do for this community show alot of what the democrats can do. I would hope that we would give them a chance.
Permit me, Mr. Huntsman, to take issue with this part of your editorial: You wrote
First, the local school board asked us to vote to for a $95.3 million dollar school bond – nothing wrong with that, except they snuck the new tax through during a primary election – mainly a Republican primary – with a perceived low voter turnout. Out of the 210,000 people who live in Weber County, only 6,000 (or less than 3 percent) of the entire county voted. In reality, all it took during this primary election to approve this bond was for about 1 percent of the populationor, or for simply all the local school teachers and their spouses to take five minutes out of their three month summer vacations and go to the voting trough. Now 210,000 residents now have higher taxes.
....
Not questioning your numbers [though teachers do not get "three month summer vacations." Commonly, they get laid off, without pay, for three months each summer. When you call three months with no pay "a vacation, " it can't help but raise some questions about your own objectivity.]
But, that aside, the fact is "the people" got a chance to vote on the tax and bond proposals. The fact that only 3% of the county's population [that would work out, I think, to a significantly larger percentage of the registered voters which is the more meaningful statistic in re: voter turnout] was willing to take "five minutes" [your phrasing] to vote at all speaks volumes about the extent to which people refuse to take part in their own governance. [Why they refuse might make a good topic for another editorial. Out of ignorance of the issues? Lack of interest? A general conviction that "my vote won't matter" because "they're all the same, those politicians. They'll do what they want regardless of what the voters want"? Or other reasons? Or a combination of the above?]
I'm really hard put to criticize the politicians for the fact that so many registered voters, when given a chance to speak, directly, by their votes, on a tax hike, refuse to vote at all. And I'm not at all sure staging tax votes during more "popular" elections [and so, presumably, insuring a higher turnout] will improve things much. Here's the problem with that: if citizen X is given a chance to vote on a new County tax, and can't be bothered to because the vote comes during a primary election and, well, he just doesn't feel like hauling himself to the polls, what is the chance that, had the same tax come up during a general election, he would have cast an educcated, informed vote just because he happened to be at the polls because he wanted to vote for governor or president or state reps? Not much, it seems to me.
Silence [at the polls] does not imply consent, but it does imply acquiesence. [Not quite the same thing.] And we know, for a fact, that when voters really oppose a tax or bond provision, they get themselves to the polls to say so. Loudly. [Didn't Davis County voters un-elect a significant number of elected officials over a tax matter not to long ago, and didn't Ogden voters turned down a school bond at the ballot tox before they approved of the lastest one?]
So, as I said, I'm hard put to fault the politicians for low turnout on tax votes, and I could make a reasonable case, I think, for arguing that silence at the polls does imply acquiesence among voters to what is being proposed.
[Note: just for the record, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a grade school, middle school or high school teacher. Nor are or have any of my immediate family members.]
Speaking of false representation of taxation!
The County Commissioners just had all of our land re-assessed at a higher level. Then play like their lowering our taxes. When in reality they just raised our taxes again.
I really hate to be a contrarian here, since I think the main point of the Huntsman editorial [that elected officials sometimes finagle with the tax ordinances in order to increase government revenues without appearing to in order to keep the voters docile] is a sound one, but.... let me ask this of "throw the bums out!":
Propety taxes are, in all communities, based on some percentage of the assessed real market value of the property involved. If, over time, that property appreciates in value and its assessed value for tax purposes is not adjusted upwards, you end up with a very skewed tax burden. New buyers end up paying a much higher percentage property tax than old owners, whose homes' values were assesed years ago before the appreciation took place. And that's not right. So periodically reassessing property values and adjusting them up [or down] in light of changes seems reasonable to me, and probably more fair than leaving way out of line assessments in place and simply raising the tax rate when necessary.
On the other hand, rising property values, frequently reassessed for tax purposes, can end up forcing older folks in rising markets out of their homes if they live on fixed incomes and they cannot pay rising taxes based on the rising value of their homes. Their homes can, litterly, become too valuable for them to keep living in them. And that's not right either.
This is one reason why property tax policy in communities is such a knotty issue to deal with.
On the Bond election that was just held. I am surprised that is wasn’t held during the “General Elections” there is a reason why it is called the "General Elections".
There is a reason why there is a day set a side for the “Primary Elections” and why it is called the “Primary Elections”. This is reserved for the “Party Elections”. Only party affiliated people go for their party elections. There are people who chose not to be republicans or democrats and have chosen one of the third parties to belong to.
It just happens to cause these people to be deprived of their voice to be heard on the bond issues. I am surprised that the ACLU hasn’t filed a brief with courts on this matter.
The general election is there for the “General Electorate” this election is to encourage “All People” who are eligible to vote to study the issues and vote for the best candidate, retain judges, and vote for the bonds and tax increases.
By having the bond issues to be determined at a primary election mainly to benefit the Republican political officials who believe in “Barrow and Spend” Bonding which is a secret tax increase which raises taxes and never seems to be lowered even if the bond is paid off. Why is this. Because by that point in time they are ready for the next new bond which will be bigger and greater purposes.
Why not let the republican party pay for the bond since it was held for their benefit.
One would say that would be absurd, well it was absurd for the republican control legislature for it to be the law of the land to allow bond elections to be held on the day of the primary elections. This is the type of the “Culture of Corruption” that has entered in to the politics of this state.
However, I an surprised that they didn’t request that the voting to be taken at the LDS temples, that way they would even have a higher percentage ratio of LDS republican voters that actually would come to the temples to vote for it.
This is just another one of those dirty politics which is business as usual, here in the good old state of Utah, dominated by those “Corrupt Republicans”.
What makes this so bad that they have no clue that this is a form of corruption.
Like gypsies that think there is nothing wrong with stealing, because they have done it so long that it has become a way of life.
Unbelievable:
You wrote: Only party affiliated people go for their party elections. There are people who chose not to be republicans or democrats and have chosen one of the third parties to belong to.
It just happens [scheduling bond elections on primary election days] to cause these people to be deprived of their voice to be heard on the bond issues.
Sorry, but that is not true. I had no primary matters to be decided in my precinct this time, but I went to the polls and voted on the bond issue, which vote was open to all, registered Democrats, Republicans, Vegetarians, Independents or what have you. If an Independent voter, or [in most districts this time, but not all] a Democratic voter choose not to go and vote in the open-to-all bond election because they had no primary contest to settle, then that's what they choose to do, out of lack of interest, out of not caring whether the bond passed or not, or out of laziness, or because the fish were biting something fiece up at Strawberry just then. But it was a decision on their part not to vote. Many independents and Democrats who had no primary election to vote in choose otherwise.
Not voting on something, not going to the polls is as much an exercise of choice on the part of a citizen as showing up and casting a ballot. I think it's unseemly for people who choose not to vote [on bond issues or any other public matter] to try to shuffle off responsibility for their decision not to vote on someone else.
Mr. Huntsman's manifesto on local property taxes, nailed to the door of the orthodox Sentinel, is merely ordinary fare in a county where taxation is conflated with Communism, homosexuality, and gun control. What makes it rich is its timing. One is hard-pressed to identify another county in which the elected officials reflect as triumphantly the people's will to banish godless Democrats. Tax policy in Weber County is made by Republicans for Republicans. These are the officials God told Mr. Huntsman to vote for. Why is he complaining? My sides are splitting.
This back door taxation scam is going on all over the state. The county assesors are being instructed from a state level, and also by the League of Cities and Towns, on how to orchestrate this enormous tax increase that is not a tax increase.
People from one end of the state to the other are literally being forced out of their homes and off their properties because of this insatiable appetite for money by politicians.
The problem is imbedded in the State Constitution that says property taxes should be based on market value. Every county tax assesor in the state now hides behind that as they gleefully extract more and more cash from the property owners of Utah.
The solution is to amend the constitution.
The change could be very simple. When a property is sold it should be taxed at the amount it sold for. True Market Value. Then till it is sold again it should only be subjected to increases in evaluation that do not exceed the inflation rate.
The property owners would then be spared this outrage. They would be protected from the official rape they are undergoing now as a result of an overheated and speculative real estate bubble. A bubble incidently that upon bursting will not automatically reduce your evaluation unless you jump through mighty hoops to get it reduced. Once the government taketh, it never giveth back willingly.
It is all fueling run away growth in local government. There are many documented cases where cities and counties have grown by 20 to 40 percent in the last ten years while their income has risen 200% to 500%.
Yet they all look us in the eye and tell us that they are not raising our taxes! Technically true I suppose, they are not raising the mill levy, they are just adjusting their opinion of the value of our property - as high as their imaginations will let them. And remember, it is THEIR opinion that counts when it comes to evaluating the value of YOUR property. They do not have to prove their opinion, the burden of proof is on the property owner. If you appeal your evaluation, your appeal is heard by the very same machine that is putting their evaluation on your property.
The underlying thing that makes this insidious practice possible is a strong one party control of all levels of State Government. Yes, we here in Utah live in a sick political system, no better than Boston, just with a slightly different twist and a "Gondola" a buildin instead of a "Big Dig" a collapsin.
Schnozz:
Good point, that for some on the right, all taxes are bad, all tax increases are unnecessary, all government spending is wasteful, and all public employees are lazy and over-paid [though for some reason, when they are in full tirade they seem not to consider soldiers government workers, which of course they are].
The problem is, elected officials who finagle with matters in order to raise money without seeming to raise taxes [when in fact they are raising taxes] play right into the hands of those who attack all taxes, all government revenues, all government expenditures. The finaglers, however well intentioned, make it much harder... much harder... for honest officials to raise taxes when, in their view, they need to be raised.
It would be far better for the town, county, state and nation if the elected would stop the word games... [Remember this Adminstration, early on? "Its' not a tax increase, it's a revenue enhancement." ] It would be far better if adminstrations [all levels] when they decided more money is needed and taxes are the best and fairest way to get it, to say so, straight out, to make their case for it to the voters, and let the chips fall where they may.
Part of the problem with doing that, however, comes from the voters. Politicos who have done that have been punished for it at the polls. Remember George Bush the First? Having promised he wouldn't raise taxes during his campaign, he became convinced once in office that the health of the economy and the rising deficit made it necessary that he do so. He did. And he was not reelected. Remember Lyndon Johnson? When it became clear that Viet Nam was going to be a long term and a very expensive struggle, he gave up on his hope that both "guns and butter" could be financed with existing taxes, and imposed a ten percent federal income tax surcharge to raise the money to pay for the war --- something the second George Bush should have done long ago, in which case we wouldn't be facing hundred billion dollar shortfalls that we have to borrow, each year, mostly from Red China, to pay our bills.] I despised Johnson at the time, but the surtax was an act of political courage ... a putting of the public good before his own and his party's interests... that I still admire. But, recall, the Dems were turned out in the next election. [Johnson, a maddeningly enigmatic leader, did the same when he wrestled the Civil Rights bill through Congress, which he knew and said would destroy the "solid South" which had voted Democratic since Reconstruction days, and would cost his party heavily. And it did. But it was the right thing to have done for the country, and he did it. Admirable, but infuriating man in many ways.]
In short, voters make it very hard for elected officials to be honest about taxes. Just another way of saying, I guess, that usually, we get the government we deserve, god help us.
If your proposed tax based o the market value at the time the property tax was sold and only was taxed at that level until it was sold again.
That just wouldn’t do in this state. We just can’t have it here. That is just unpatriotic.
That means it would encourage people to stay in their homes until they died to avoid a tax increase and keep it fixed up.
This would wreck it for the local board of Realtors that need a income from people who have to move from their homes every several homes which means less commissions.
It would wreck it for the political administrators that could not count on severance packages because the money would never be there for them in the first place.
It would wreck if for contractors who are counting on pork barrel projects of the government, mainly local government.
It would wreck if for administrators that create jobs for their buddies.
It would wreck it for any blood sucking attorney that is looking for a way to milk the government. Having property going to tax relief auctions to pay off back taxes that increased with in recent years.
It would wreck it for those that are slum landlords, that are swapping properties and pawn them off to some other guy. Instead to make them or encourage them to fix that property up to livable conditions without the fear by doing so of the property tax will not increase until they sell the property.
But the number one reason why not to;
Because it makes to much dam common sense.
I just watched Channel 2 news with Rod Decker. He is reporting on Labor day and how much less of money the blue collar worker has in compared in the last twenty years.
I believe it will be on again at 6:00 and at 10:00, it will be a very interesting piece to watch to any of you interested in watching.
I have heard that this state is called a right to work state, which is a laughable offense.
However, the correct terminology is; “The Right To Be Treated Like a Slave” state.
If we were really a “Right to Work” State. That would mean that I can go into the State employment office and demand that they give me a job. Because after all that is my right to have a job. That must provide me with a job because it is my right to have a job. I am entitled to have a job. Right, Wrong! Than what does a right to work state mean?
It means they hate labor unions. They hate organized labor. And a thing called “Collective Bargaining”. In this state it is called “Collective Begging”.
First of all the only thing believable about unbelievable is how utterly uninformed he is.
I feel sorry for Curmudgeon, he seems like the only one that knows anything about government. I am sure he gets tired of clearing up all the lies that are perpetrated on this board.
As for the school bond elections being held on the primary elections rather than the general election, a little history lesson may be in order. It use to be that we had 'special elections' for those things. Rarely were bond elections held on either primary or general election day. Many criticized school boards and local governments for doing it this way because 'special elections' nearly always had lower turnout than even primary elections. So the legislature decided that 2 elections per year would be enough and would guarantee larger voter turnouts. The school boards and local officials argued that by lumping bond elections with the general elections voters would not be paying attention as much to the bond elections and would cast uninformed votes (which to them usually means a vote against a tax increase). And here I would disagree with Curmudgeon about all those voters choosing not to vote. I believe that just like unbelievable there were a significant number of voters who either didn't know about the bond elections or truly believed that because they were not Republican, they could not vote in the election. Along with those who chose not to vote. Unfortunately that speaks to the intelligence and education of the electorate.
As for Steve Huntsman's rant, I brought this up during budget time for the cities and was assured that the cities were reducing their rates for the 911 district tax increase. I just have to say that Riverdale (where I live) did not reduce their tax rate for the increase in the 911 districts tax and I live in the same school district as him and yet my tax bill went up by less than 1% (about $10). That was a combination of a slightly reduced valuation and reductions in almost all of the tax mille leavies.
And for a lesson on how property taxes in Utah are calculated. Ozboy has some of the facts correct but one thing that he leaves out, and a reason why politicians don't raise your taxes as often as they probably should is the 'truth in taxation' law. This law says that governments should not get increased revenue from general increases in valuations. So just because county assessor says your house is now worth $200,000 when last year they said it was worth $100,000, those assessing taxes on your house should not reap a 100% increase in taxes. The law says they should only get as much revenue this year as they got last year unless they 'raise' your taxes. They do get to collect more if there has been growth in the area. So someone that built a home will have to pay taxes on the value of the home and not just the lot that existed last year.
Now since it is done as a whole for the taxing entity (school district, city, county ...) a particular home may have to pay more in taxes even though the mille leavie went down because of the county's 'certification' of the tax rate. The county looks at what the entity got last year looks at the total assessed value of the property this year less new growth and divides that out to tell the entity the maximum rate they can charge in taxes. You will normally see this rate going down because the value of existing property is going up.
Now if the taxing entity wants to increase your taxes (raise their revenue) they must go through a 'truth in taxation' hearing. This requires them to take out a quarter page ad in the newspaper and spell out what is happening and then let the public comment on that. Since no one likes a tax increase and this ad gets people boiling mad they come out to the hearing and give the elected officials an earful. Since elected officials and me are just like you and don't like to get yelled at and called names to our faces we try to do anything we can to not have one of those hearings. Often these are put off so long that when it comes time to have a tax increase instead of it being a 5-10% increase it becomes a 121% or some other astronomical number and it really ticks people off. Of course since the elected officials know they are going to be yelled at and called names they would rather do it one time and have it over with than to go through that hell every year.
I don't know if that is going to help anyone but maybe one person will better understand the process so that they will understand that while ozboy is right that people can be taxed right out of their home, it is probably not as bad as he makes it out to be and more fair as Curmudgeon pointed out.
And a point I meant to make in the thread about Glassman. The Ogden City budget did have an increase from 2 to 3 full time 'Senior Project Managers'. That was how the position came to be. It was requested of and approved by the City Council.
Arcritic:
Thanks for the reminder about Utah's unique [at least in my experience] "truth in taxation" law. I read about that some months ago in the much maligned SE, but had forgotten. [No other state I've lived in had that arrangement.] Thanks for the reminder.
You wrote: And here I would disagree with Curmudgeon about all those voters choosing not to vote. I believe that just like unbelievable there were a significant number of voters who either didn't know about the bond elections or truly believed that because they were not Republican, they could not vote in the election. Along with those who chose not to vote. Unfortunately that speaks to the intelligence and education of the electorate.
Well, I don't think we are disagreeing all that much. My reply would be it's a citizens job to keep him or herself informed about elections, bond votes, etc. One of the responsibilities of living in a democracy. Perhaps the state and municipalities could do a better job of public notice and publicity, but in the end, it's pretty much a citizen's job, seems to me, to keep him or herself informed.
Which is why I find the declining number of people in general, and of high school and college students in particular, who read a newspaper every day [any newspaper for any reason] so unsettling.
curmudgeon, you are correct that we agree much more than we disagree and this may simply be an interpretation issue.
I know my council discussed how we could get the word out to the citizens about the bond election.
My daughter started college a couple of weeks ago and the first day of her english class the prof. gave a quiz. She said she knew the answer to only one question. She said after the quiz the prof indicated every question came from an article in the paper that day. She found that students can get a subscription for something like $10-20 for the semester and that she was probably going to get one and start reading it. Hopefully that will become a good habit for her. But I wish it was not something that you had to go to college to learn.
Arcritic
Make sure you have your daughter subscribe to the SL Tribune. If she starts reading the Sub Standard she certainly is not going to get a very good education unless she is majoring in incompetent inconsequentual news organizations.
The Standard actually used to be a pretty good paper until the suits of Sandusky picked it up cheap and started to milk all the money and talent out of it.
Luckily, she is not going to the local university.
arcritic:
Ahem. Well, there's more to be said about that, I think.
But I'll limit myself just now to pointing out that WSU, thanks to support from the Provost's Office, now has the NYTimes available daily during the school week at several campus locations, where it is available to students for use in appropriate courses, free. And I should add that the Standard Examiner has signed on to the program as well and is providing copies to students at the same locations, free of charge, five days a week for use in appropriate courses.
This is a good program, and I'm glad the Provost at WSU is supporting it and that the Times and the Standard Examiner are a part of it. A panacea for the appalling level of awareness of public affairs by young people? No. But it's a start.
To answer the question of what paper is better the Standard or the Tribune I decided to do a lab test.
The standard won by a big margine.
My Lab much prefers crapping on the Standard more than the Tribune. Don Porter's Editorial page especially loosened him up
So enough already about the standard not being worth a tinkers damn. It is the best dam paper around for house training dogs
Well, not to beat the topic into the ground, seems to me the best paper to read [if you only read one] and you live in Ogden is the SE. And the best paper to read [if you only read one] and you live in SLC is the Trib.
90% of these problems with elected officals doing as they please, could be fixed if Utah had a provision for recalling elected officals. They have nothing to fear when we can't hold them accountable.
Except that Ogden reelected Godfrey.
Arcritic:
Yup. We elected him twice. Eyes wide open the second time. Of course, he didn't bother to mention during his campaign the gondola proposal which he was already planning. But we did re-elect him.
Most times, we get the government we deserve. And if that doesn't keep you up nights, nothing will.
Arcritic
The only reason that Mr. Godfrey was elected the second time was because he had the very weakest opposition possible.
While Mr. Garcia is a nice guy, he is a relatively inefective politician and a leader. The district he represents is small and ethnic with very low voter turnout. In the last election for council he barely beat out his opponent who was a completely unqualified, incompetent and white carpetbagger. Still she almost beat him in his own long held home turf.
The other major element, unfortunately, is that Mr. Garcia is hispanic and Ogden will not elect him to be mayor regardless of his qualifications and abilities. This is especially true in the voter rich above Harrison well off population. All quite sad as he would make a lot better mayor than Mr. Godfrey.
Sad but true
While I agree with what you wrote concerning Jesse Garcia, you forgot the punch line.
In spite of all, He almost beat Godfrey!
It was generally recognized by those that follow local politics that the numbers and outcome of that election was actually an indicator of the Mayor's unpopularity.
You have to wonder what the Mayor's second term might have been like had he chosen to abandon [especially after the last Council election] his bull-in-the-china shop approach to governance and substituted for it a management style that rested on cooperation and consultation instead of confrontation. I wish he had.
I know, I know, if wishes were horses then beggars would ride.
Curmudgeon
Or
Wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which gets full the fastest.
New comments are not allowed.