Who's up next?
Okay, barring some last-minute filers, it looks like we have at least four candidates for mayor.
Cast your vote in this first Observer Straw Poll. Who's your favorite and why? Here's your chance to advertise for your candidate. Make it sound convincing, even if you think it's the lesser of five evils.
The candidates are:
Bill Burkett (councilman, former city employee, union backer, flip-flopper, kidney patient).
John Iacoangeli (ex-mayor, ex-city planner, current planning consultant, somewhat uncompromising dreamer and spender)
Pat McElligott (retired insurance man, realtor, blusterer, and grandstander)
Cheryl McIntyre (fundraiser, widow, divorcee, political newcomer).
Mark Worrell (ex-councilman, maverick, tightwad, straight arrow, ex-teacher)
Now if you don't like any of the above, who do you think should run for mayor?
Cast your vote in this first Observer Straw Poll. Who's your favorite and why? Here's your chance to advertise for your candidate. Make it sound convincing, even if you think it's the lesser of five evils.
The candidates are:
Bill Burkett (councilman, former city employee, union backer, flip-flopper, kidney patient).
John Iacoangeli (ex-mayor, ex-city planner, current planning consultant, somewhat uncompromising dreamer and spender)
Pat McElligott (retired insurance man, realtor, blusterer, and grandstander)
Cheryl McIntyre (fundraiser, widow, divorcee, political newcomer).
Mark Worrell (ex-councilman, maverick, tightwad, straight arrow, ex-teacher)
Now if you don't like any of the above, who do you think should run for mayor?
posted by The Observer at 9/06/2007 08:38:00 AM
16 Comments:
I guess to me the obvious choice would be Mark Worrell. He is obviously well versed in capital improvements, due to his seat on the Citizens Planning Commission, and he is also conservative enough to handle the tough cuts that obviously need to be made. By his public commments about making cuts, he shows that he is able and willing to do what it takes to keep from raising taxes, and still repair our streets and infrastructure. I hope if he does get elected that he will have a fiscally responsible council to back him up on the tough cuts ahead, and no more of this "I'm all for public safety" crap. Everyone is for public safety after all.
The one candidate that scares me the most is John Iacoangeli. He brings good ideas, which in a better economic time would be fine, but I have heard the replay of his "bite the bullet and raise taxes" program on cable too many times. With all of the people facing job losses, and the very real possibility of even more rapidly declining home values, what we don't need in the City is more taxes than we already pay. I can't wait to hear if he uses that "raise taxes" speech in his bid for election.
As for the rest of the candidates, I see Bill Burkett garnering a good portion of the votes. He has always been a team player, and he doesn't stir the pot much. His track record is pretty clean for his years on Council, with a slight bump or two, but he has a good name and many want stability.
Pat McElligott should withdraw, simply due to instability. He gets way to emotional about "his" street and "his" marital problems, and "his" problems with the courts. He is bringing dead weight with him, and doen't stand a chance.
Cheryl McIntyre definitely has the funds to run a high dollar campaign, and just the name recognition could help her lack of governmental experience. She seems honest and sincere about just wanting to get the City back on track financially and emotionally, but with the lack of experience, she is not a proven leader, or even second in command. I can hear another speech about having a plan which will blow us away, and we know that that talk was cheap (but really expensive).
Just my comments, and can't wait to hear others.
If you want a Mayor with the common sense to lead in a crisis and we are there concerning needing repair of infrastructure, Mark Worrell is the only one who has a clue concerning leadership and what needs done.
It's time for Bill Burkett.
Pro's - Understands city politics and council decorum. Has a good grasp of the issues. Is not infected with the "vision" bug that seems to stop "common sense". Respectful. Sincere. Not interested in promoting only himself.
Con's - Has waivered at times.
John, as is apparant to all, has great dreams. But, he simply does not play well with others and considering our current state of affairs does not represent the future of where we need to be going. Now is not a time to take one step forward and two steps back.
Pat seems like a sincere person who wants the City to take steps that will not only keep us solvent but will also keep the City moving forward. But, his baggage is difficult to get past and he tends to opine a bit too much.
Cheryl could be the "dark horse" of the race. She is very well connected and does have a good understanding of the in's and out's of Monroe. But, because I am hoping for a nearly clean (i.e. new) slate of Council members I am hoping for a Mayor with more experience.
Mark is probably the most intelligent and insightful candidate. There will be no arguments about water, candy bars or hot dogs with Mark around. But, Mark also tends to get mired in details that become excessive and boarder on micro managing - something that we can not afford at this point.
Good luck to all and at least we now have more folks getting involved. Here, to me, is the most interesting statistic - We have only a 1 in 5 chance of having a Mayor with an "I" at the end of his name being elected - when was the last time that happened?
Observer,
That is an easy decision.
Mark Worrell understands the position the city is in, the importance of having your finances in order, and the importance of capital improvements to move a city forward. He has experience serving on the council, and many commissions and committees. He knows how the city works, and how it can be improved. He seems to grasp the inequities the state has made between the townships and the cities. He understands the townships are currently providing a better value to many citizens for their money. He understands the danger of cities becoming the bastion on the wrecks and the reeks, and steps we need to take to prevent that. He is a good listener and a good teacher. He is the clear best choice for mayor. We are frankly lucky that he is willing to run and take on the burden of filling Cappi’s big shoes.
I like Bill Burkett as an individual, but I have some concerns about his qualifications to be mayor. He does have many years serving on council, and he is a good listener. I am afraid he is too beholden to the union mindset, and this may cloud his judgment and he might protect union jobs of city employees instead of focusing on what is best for the city. I am also afraid that Bill would try to please everyone, which could turn out badly.
John Iacoangeli’s record speaks for itself. He is an excellent planner and has an excellent vision for the city. With those good traits comes an attitude against certain groups in the city and a penchant to cover up financial disasters. If you want a caustic guy who is better suited to a dictatorship, and a guy who spends like a drunken sailor on shore leave getting a lap dance at the local strip club, he is your guy. For my input I wouldn’t recommend voting for him.
Pat McElligott is an armchair quarterback who pretends to have the answers, but never appeared to care enough to actually get involved. Sure he shows up to meetings and has been known to pull entire consent agendas so he can ask silly questions and make obvious statements, but honestly besides harping on the operational assessment, what is his position? What is his plan? Does he really understand how to run the show? I have my doubts. He should have run for council again or maybe get on a committee / commission, but the step to Mayor is too large.
Cheryl McIntyre – I have no idea why anyone would vote for her. How can bringing civility to council be a platform? It should be assumed as a minimum that the Mayor runs the meetings with proper decorum and treats people with respect. With the exceptions of John Iacoangeli and Linda Compora I would say everyone who has been on the council the last 10 or 20 years understands that. Maybe she has great experience in government or running a business I don’t know about, but I haven’t been informed of what it is.
I would suggest to Pat, Cheryl, and Bill that they bow out of the race. Mark and John have clear visions of what they would do for the city, and they are actually qualified for the position. This would give the citizens two qualified candidates with very different visions, approaches, and demeanors to choose from.
With that said, however, this is America and anyone who can get the signatures should be free to run, and any citizen should feel free to vote for the candidate of their choice.
I am anxious to hear what others think. I understand that unlike just the facts I am not all knowing. I am, however, open-minded and willing to change my mind based on new information.
Any word on who is running for council in each precinct?
Roundybout.
I'm sorry for the Freudian slip. In my original post I said we have at least four candidates for mayor.
The correct number is five, obviously. But the real number is three.
I think McElligott and McIntyre are just muddying the waters here. If they really care about the city, they should drop out and try to land on a committee or serve on council. You can't just watch council meetings to figure out how the city really works. The remaining three have been around city hall for so long, they know where the skeletons are and what the problems are. They just all sort of define "problems" in a different way. I'm not going to tout one or the other now until I hear more from each.
ok, lets move on to council.
1st Robert Clark over Jeff Hensley
2nd Ed Paisley will narrowly defeat Rick Floraday and Tonya Sweat
3rd Calvin McGee (unopposed)
4th John Martin will again crush his opposition
5th Mary Conners slides by Tom Rosenberger and Compora third
6th Brian Beneteau (unopposed)
clerk Charlie Evans (unopposed)
I see that Cheryl McIntyre has rented a building on the corner of First & Monroe and has had and will continue to have open houses to meet this candidate for Mayor. Now don't get me wrong, she was not my first choice for Mayor, but she is going about this in the right way, by meeting with the citizens. Maybe this candidate has some innovative ideas for the direction of the city. I like her efforts, and time will tell.
I agree with the council calls made by cityresident. Further, what Cheryl is doing is close to what Guyor did with teas in the homes of some of the citizens who support historic preservation and saw her as a good leader. I believe all of these people have regretted their support because she was in tight with IACO and danced to his tune which required some fancy steps when trying to take away the free speech rights of the downtown merchants in exchange for ticket validation rights.
The essential person not to reelect is IACO—look at the vacant United Furniture Building that IACO and Floraday blessed us with. It is sad when you must decide based on whom not to elect.
Burkett can do the job but does he have the guts to explore the arrangements we should be making with the townships and county to share law enforcement and fire fighting costs—I doubt that his pro labor union stance would permit him to even tackling our biggest cost.
Worrell has the vision and brains to tackle the escalating labor cost and erosion of tax base issues which have an obvious fixes. Ask yourself who would have the guts to meet with the adjoining township leaders and explore combining fire departments which may permit closing two satellite fire stations. Who could tackle a tough but needed task?
Between Burkett and Worrell, who could negotiate effectively with the townships and jointly decide where our main station should be located if indeed one is needed.
Who is willing to stand up to the Monroe Evening News and tell them to go micromanage the newspaper to improve their news accuracy rather than vex the city who to vote for and how things should be done.
The newspaper is about worthless. I already know US-23 will not be repaired anytime soon. I an aware that skeeters will bite people—next we should have half the front page devoted to bees that sting. Anyone can see that the polluted historic river through town is growing up with brush. I hold the princess compared to Sister Teresa to be a common whore by most people’s standards.
At what point does everyone remember that we do not have a "strong mayor" form of government? I think Bill Burkett is perfect for this position right now; he will not slow down the work of the professional managers hired to run the City (George Brown, Ed Sell, Patrick Lewis and so on).
The whole "stand up" to the union argument is BS - the mayor is only one vote. The argument of negotiating with the township is also BS - this will be done by the City Manager and other staff. While the Mayor and council will be involved at times and in the end they will not be the defining personalities.
Depending on the outcome of the feasibility study regarding installing an underpass on W. Elm railroad tracks it will take very little "guts" to close down a fire station.
Good luck to all candidates and lets hope that this election isn't about a bad mouthing the last guy but about a better future.
Alacajun:
I always respect your opinions (and this one too) but you've got to be joking if you think the mayor is just one vote. Historically, it's usually been four or five votes and, historically, the city manager (including Mr. Brown) gets their best intentions bent, warped and mutated by the majority that can fire him or her at any moment. In my view, some of the best "politicians" in town have been city managers or county administrators or road commission managers or school superintendents (oh I could go on and on, couldn't I?).
Observer -
Thanks - I too respect yours. But, I am honestly serious. I think that part of the problem has been that power has been controlled by fiat too often in my history of living in Monroe (er, my entire life).
Part of the reason that I selected the candidates that I did is that they are not typically part of the "Old Guard" if you will. I think a new voices, opinions, ideals and direction can help greatly.
Do I understand that in the past Mayor's, County CEO/CFO's, City Managers and others have monopolized the agenda and directed it to what they want. Of course, but, with all the doom and gloom I think we have a real opportunity to make substantial changes - we should try.
I like all of the comments posted. I believe that Mark Worrell is the best candidate for mayor. He brings a sense of compassion for the city and its residents. He's not afraid to tackle the tuff decisions that are faced ahead of the city. He is honest and has the most experience in these difficult times. He is definitely the man!
Tsk, Tsk.
Don't you guys do ANY research at all about what's happening to the taxpayers in this town? Just blow off at the mouth without facts?
You all think Mark Worrell is the "man", right?
If you had done your research on your "man", you would have known that it was Mark Worrell who caved in to Al and at every meeting between 8-5-1996 and 10-1-01 it was your man Worrell who either made the motion, seconded it and voted YES for all things ice area related. Well now!
Even though there was no feasibility study on this ice rink and the total construction, etc was handed over to Jack Vivian- it was your yes man Worrell all the way.
Now you and I are stuck with the monkey on our backs with no relief in sight and your man has his name on a plaque out at the ice rink!
Let's talk about the "urban sprawl" that your man pontificates about constantly. Totally against it, right? Think again.
According to record between 1999 and 2002 there were agreements entered into to sell Monroe City water to Exeter, Dundee, Ida,Petersbutg and Frenchtown Charter Twps. Guess what? Your man Worrell voted yes on all but 2, Ida and Exeter and to make matters worse, your man made the actual motions to sell the other twps. water and it sailed through 7-0.
And here's the best part on 4-1-2002 Worrell stated at a council meeting that he does not agree with the water philosophy and he would prefer being able to see more numbers in the budget, but guess who voted for it... that's right! Worrell! It passed 6-0 with Burkett excused.
So your man Worrell for all his pontification and holier than thou speeches has made it possible for other communities to benefit and even lower their taxes for their citizens at the expense of you and me!! Dundee is bustling, Monroe is practically a ghost town. What a guy! And from the time Burkett got on council he voted yes to selling our water too! And has continued to be a yes man.
If Worrell thought the water philosophy was so wrong, why didn't he stand up against it instead of caving in?
He NEVER stood up and fought against it, he just went along with the crowd.
So you think he has the guts to enforce the operational study because he gets up in council meetings and pontificates? His record should speak for itself and it does to me loud and clear.
He talks a good game, but the record speaks for itself. The man has no conviction whatsoever, a real wuss.
He is talkig around town how he's going to close 2 fire stations and get rid of 9 firefighters, you'd better be thinking what happens when your house burns, and when the insurance companies get wind of fire stations closing is your man going to pay YOUR sky high premium?
Mark Worrell sat 18 years on council because he went with the flow and never rocked the boat. Now you think he's the best thing to come down the pike in a long time, but the actions of your "man" has in the end, cost us taxpayers here dearly.
Instead of blowing off at the mouth some of you should take the time to do some research on past actions that have put us in the hole now and our mess is not due to John Iocoangeli, the blame is on Capp., Worrell and Burkett.
You carp about Iocoangeli improving parks, but that's part of the infrastructure. Check out literature from the State, etc. they all say park improvement is a necessary part of infrastructure imprvement.
So for their yes votes on water selling, Worrell and Burkett have made possible the mass exodus of Monroe taxpayers to the outlying townships. Nice forward thinking visionaries these two.
THESE are the drunken sailors on shore leave spending our money to the tune of 1/2 million per year plus more for operating costs for the ice rink blunder and if you count up the $$ spent by tourists and other visitors to the much improved townships made possible by OUR water it probably adds up to millions. Reference the expanding village of Dundee who just lowered taxes for their citizens and built a $3 million dollar township hall. Cabela's didn't go there because they had well water!
Thank you Monroe, for your stupidity and our prosperity.
And thank you John for your comments.
Monroe Truth,
By your logic we should only vote in people with absolutely no track record to go against them.
Mayor: Cheryl McIntyre
1st Precint: You have a choice
2nd Precinct: Tonya
4th Precinct: The new guy
5th Precinct: The new guy
Your logic escapes me.
Just vote for the people who want a happy, civil council and see what we get.
Dear Blogger IACO by any other name. Your bias shows through loud and clear. Given the simple fact that your campaign style can get you elected much the same was as Hitler came to power in Germany because people can let their emotions overrule any common sense they have, you are too dangerous to be running for any office.
Post a Comment
<< Home