Smithville TODAY

"Building Bridges for Tomorrow"

Despite ballot box safeguards put in place by DeKalb County’s Election Commission,

techniques are available to distort the will of the voters.

Campaign Dirty Tricks

*Buying Votes: Past attempts to stack ballots with fictitious names is no secret.  And while the political game involves push and pull, the use of cash as a persuader carries criminal sanctions.  Mostly out-of-style in these parts, old-timers recall a TBI sting that resulted in a citizen having to cough up a $5,000 fine for attempting to corrupt the ballot count by forking out cash for votes.

*Dirty Tricks:  Still in vogue, some campaigns resort to stealing campaign signs or lifting a stack of one candidate’s cards on public display and replacing them with propaganda touting a competitor.

*Phony Tax Threat:  "Elect my opponent and she or he will raise your taxes!!!"  This shop-worn line may fool some of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time.  Old-as-the-hills, blatant distortion of facts by claiming an opponent will "raise taxes" represents bogus tactics.  No voter wants to pay more taxes than necessary; no thinking voter buys this con-job!

*False Rumors:    Forget the scare phrase, "If elected, my opponent will move the Smithville Jamboree to another city!" This rumor is 180° from fact!  It just "ain’t" true!

*Arm Twisting: The intimidation card is played by insecure, incompetent incumbents desperate to cling to political power!  Symbolically twisting arms of city employees with a whispered, "Remember I went to bat for you to get you this job," smacks of indirect "vote buying." by guilt trip.  Intimidation using guilt-trip pressure won’t cut it with most city employees. 

*Hatfield/McCoy Syndrome: Voting for or against a candidate because some long gone great-grandfather insulted some ancient great-uncle, is a last resort technique that speaks more to the low threshold of a voter’s mentality than to the quality of the vote cast. Floundering deep in the senseless meanness of a Hatfield/McCoy mentality offers nothing. 

*Verbal Venom: When all else fails, resort to the sleaze factor by spouting anonymous, unfounded verbal attacks on an opponent’s supporters signals pitiful ignorance inspired by pathetic desperation.   

After Ballots are Tallied

Self-serving methodologies subversive to public interest tempts incumbency!

*Subvert the Law: Intentionally thumbing-a-nose at state and local law for political purpose distorts democracy.  When recently asked if he didn’t feel bound by Smithville’s Charter and Code, an incumbent candidate has been quoted as shrugging, "not necessarily!"

*Dismiss Voter Inquiries: While politically near-sighted, an incumbent candidate is positioned to turn his back and ignore voter requests for data.  In recent days, when one citizen approached City Hall requesting names and addresses of Aldermen, he was told, "Go look in the phone book."  It’s contradictory to claim to represent community interests while shunning communication with voters.

*Manipulate Board Agendas: Refuse citizen requests for placing an item on the Board of Aldermen agenda and remove an agenda item placed at the request of an Alderman.  This heavy-handed manipulation continues as we speak.

* Keep Citizens in the Dark: Voters can be kept in the dark when requests for copies of public information are met by dragging feet and erecting bureaucratic hurdles.  Within the last year, one incumbent Alderman, currently running for reelection, voted against a four-person Board majority action that opened public records to the light of day at a reasonable cost to the taxpayer! 

*Media Partiality: Until challenged to be fair to both Smithville newspapers, the current City CEO admitted channeling all city advertising exclusively to one local newspaper.  Did the tactic earn a reporting spin favorable to the administration?

*Budgeting: An out-of-town financial consultant was awarded $13,000 of tax payer’s money, for services rendered in September, 2007.  Who is this person?  Who appointed her?  Did the Board of Aldermen approve her retainer?  Why doesn’t her name, work assignment, and a fee of this magnitude specifically identified in either the budget or the audit?

*Preferential Personnel Treatment: The City advertised for a Police Department "investigator" to replace a resigned officer who had been compensated at the rate of $15.95 per hour.  The Board majority voted to accept the Police Chief’s recommendation to hire a more experienced, local replacement at the same hourly rate. The incumbent Mayor, supported by two incumbent Aldermen, also candidates for reelection, vetoed the majority vote and reduced the new-hire’s pay to $11.89 per hour.

Is it mere coincidence that the incumbent Mayor offered the traditional $15.95 per-hour rate to a third party, out-of-towner, who rejected his offer while the local applicant who accepted the appointment happens to be the son of an Aldermen who opposed the current Mayor’s 2006 candidacy? 

*Veto of Majority Vote: An executive veto prevents the tyranny of the majority.  Conversely, a veto itself can be a less-than-subtle tyranny of an executive intent on trampling the will of the majority. Five vetoes in seven months, unprecedented in Smithville government, paves a tortured political trail to nowhere.

1)   July 20, 2007: the Mayor vetoed Police Chief Stufano’s suspension;

2)   October 25, 2007: the Mayor vetoed Board’s October 15 action to accept the

      low bid and enter into a contract for a new golf course sprinkler system; 

3)   December 17, 2007: Mayor vetoed Board action to amend Budget to fund

     the sprinkler system contract;

4)   December 17, 2007: vetoed Board action to hire certified court recorder;

5)   February 18, 2008: vetoed newly hired Police Inspector’s pay scale.

*Pork: A city administration is positioned to play the Santa Claus/Scrooge Card with tax money after the ballots have been counted.  Smithville’s Municipal Park on Smith Road, created in 1979, has fallen into abysmal disrepair while tax money has been invested in the construction of a new sidewalk beginning at the corner of Bell and South Mountain Street across the front of an incumbent Alderman’s home.

*Entitlements: A million dollar investment in a new city firehouse can be justified but opposing access to multi-million dollar reserves in an effort to prevent or postpone construction of an Activity Center for kids on land already owned by the city, without raising taxes, smacks of upside-down priorities. 

Ask an Incumbent Candidate

Before casting a ballot June 17, 2008, independent-minded citizens will investigate incumbent candidates’ records and will ask penetrating questions, rather than cast knee-jerk ballots.  Voters possess the right and the duty to look a candidate in the eye, demanding straight answers.

Do you know what motivates a candidate?  Is it an ego trip?  A power grab?  Does the candidate really intend to improve local living conditions?

"What have you actually done to improve the lives of Smithville taxpayers?"

    

"Have you reached out to unite citizens, considering all points of view?"

"Is there some reason the incumbent Mayor has named a previous mayor and present incumbent Alderman as Commissioner of Police despite his lack of Police Officer Standards Training (POST) certification as required by Tennessee Law?"

"What specific new industries offering new job opportunities have been brought to the City thanks to your leadership?" 

"Did you vote to sustain any one of the mayor’s five vetoes in seven months?"

"How does an incumbent Alderman explain voting with three other Aldermen in support of a new golf course sprinkler system then later voting against funding the contract?"

"What beautification plans for enhancing the esthetic needs of our community have you proposed?"

"Why has the Smith Road city park been allowed to deteriorate while tax money has been invested to construct a new sidewalk, from corner to corner in front of an incumbent Alderman candidate’s residence?  Did you authorize earmarking funds for the sidewalk?" 

"If you don’t put a portion of the $6 million capital reserves to work to create an Activity Center, would you support returning the surplus tax fund to the taxpayers?"

"Do you believe it is fair to pay $15.95 per-hour to a recently resigned Police Investigator and only $11.89 to his replacement with superior credentials who puts his life on the line every day serving the City?"

"How do you defend paying the new Investigator the same $11.89 per hour currently being paid to a suspended officer charged with negligence in an accident resulting in the death of a Smithville teenager?"

"What benefit did the City receive for allocating its paid advertising exclusively to the Review while excluding the Times?"

"Did you oppose and vote against the new open government guarantee in the City Code?  Your rationale?"

"In the two years of your expiring term, what specific plans have you offered to enhance the social, educational and recreational needs of our kids? What innovative plans have you offered for the future, if reelected?"

"Do you intend to continue to ignore citizen letters of inquiry and recommendation rather than reach out with courteous and prompt responses?"

"With the prospect of available grant money beneficial to children, do you support creating an Activity Center accommodating that program?"

"Do you believe that water plant employees need to be certified?  How about proper certification for all other City employees as per Tennessee legal requirements?"

Come June 17, 2008, Smithville voters should ask themselves,

"What kind of a City do I want my kids to inherit?"

Come June 18, it could be too late to ask!

WLJ

How to "Hijack" an Election

May 26, 2008