Su Lum: More ballot issues
The grand prize for the worst advertising campaigns goes to United States Senate candidates Wayne Allard and Tom Strickland, whose attack ads hit what I hope is an all-time low.
I wouldn’t vote for either one of these jerks if I weren’t so disillusioned about the Republican war party and scared to death about the direction the country is heading in. With that in mind, I will (holding my nose) vote for Tom Strickland (Democrat) to try to keep the congressional majority out of the hands of the Republicans.
Going down the ballot, along the same line I’ll vote for Berckefeldt over Scott McInnis for U.S. representative, Heath over Owens for governor, Martinez over Davidson for secretary of state, Phillips over Coffman for treasurer, Salazar for attorney general, Gallegos for state senate and Davis for state representative.
As usual, I have to confess ignorance regarding the candidates for state board of education ? an entity I think should be abolished ? and the various judges, except for Pitkin County’s Fernandez-Ely (yes).
I can’t believe I have to endorse Mick Ireland AGAIN because AGAIN he is running against a non-opponent. If you think it would be cute to vote for Ramon Duvernay to “send a message to Mick,” be careful what you wish for. If Duvernay wins and cannot serve, a successor will be appointed by the remaining commissioners.
Between Patti Clapper the scrapper and Tim Mooney the Idea Man, I pick Patti Clapper.
Sylvia Davis (clerk and recorder), Tom Issac (county assessor) and Bob Braudis (county sheriff) are all running unopposed, so a yes vote is just a vote of confidence, which I’ll gladly give them.
Last week I wrote about the state amendments and resolutions, and am now teetering on amendment 27 regarding campaign finance reform. I recommended NO because it was so complex and restrictive, but after seeing, in the Allard/Strickland race, how campaign money is spent with the marketing companies, I’m starting not to care if these guys can’t raise a dime and will probably vote YES.
County Referendum 1A, to increase property taxes in the amount of $800,000 for the next five years, dedicated to social services: Yes.
1B, to harmonize county campaign finance provisions with federal law: Yes.
1C, S-curves or Straight Shot (modified direct alignment), YeSSSS for the S-curves. This is the county question.
City referendum 2C: instead of publishing the full text of ordinances in the newspaper, to publish the title only. A big NO on this. People read these notices, subscribers who live out of town and out of state read them, and they should be published in full. Disclaimer: I sell ads for The Aspen Times but I do not get commission on legal notices.
Referendum 2D, the trolleys. This is another issue I may change my mind on when I get in the voting booth, because there is no financial risk involved and a slew of safeguards, so it comes down to “do you like the idea of the trolleys?” and I’m not sure I do.
Finally, Referendum 2E, S-curve/Straight Shot ? this is the city vote, the important one. Vote YeSSS for the S-curves.
[Su Lum is a longtime local who hopes you check out the new format of the sample ballot in last week’s Aspen Times Weekly. Her column appears every Wednesday in The Aspen Times.]
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.