This may be a stupid question but is that your real name?

real picture too

Don't recognize you but you somehow know me. Guess I'll figure it out in time.

I appreciate your sage advice, Mr Morgan, and hope that you will be attending some or all of the candidate forums to "help me" clarify that issue.

I refuse to dignify anonymous bloggers. Without the courage to sign one's opinions, unlike yourself -- one is a coward.

My wife was a devoted and loyal military spouse for over 20 years and never in our 38 years has she attempted to influence my professional life. I do the same for her and even if she were Doug Mitchell's partner -- I could not ask her to change jobs for my political aspirations. People will either accept my word ... or not, that I have no ties to PCDC (or any other developer) and take that and my clearly stated objections to Callulah Hills to the polls.

Gee whiz les, so I'm a coward, because I won't expose my wife and kid to retribution for my opinions. Well I have to say les, bite me, obviously you don't know what has happened here on the "C" before you became a member. Now I don't live in PTC, so I have no dog in this fight, but your blanket statements take in more people then you realize. Obviously if you were as smart as you think you are, you would know Mr. Morgan here is using the name and picture of a dead DJ from California. I'm not worried that someone can do me harm, or embarrass me, but I won't subject my family to the abuse some on here have taken from disgruntled bloggers just so I can voice my opinions. We've had one man lose his job over blogging here and the employers of another alerted, so again "bite me".

I yam what I yam....Popeye

Damn Hutch, I just can't figure out the animosity behind your reply to Les's post. I don't know him,don't know you either but I know we all share a military background experience (42 yrs for me, don't know how much for you). His comments all seem up front and honest and if I lived in PTC, he would probably get my vote. I believe it's narrow-minded for any voter to judge his candidacy based on his spouse's employment. But as a resident in the unincorporated county, I don't have a dog in the hunt.

I could care less about his candidacy, or who his wife works for, the comment that chapped my cheeks was that just because I don't sign my real name, I'm a coward. I despise blanket statements, and my opinion is no less valid because I won't sign my real name. Do you remember Denise Connor who got someone fired because she didn't like his comments, or Hack, who someone squealed on because surprise, they didn't like his comments.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

I wouldn't dare put my real name on here. Too many lunatics out there. A couple of lunatic bloggers did a lot of damage to some of my favorite blogger friends.

Tug

Hutch, I guess I've missed something in this exchange--clearly, I don't use my real name but I have no fear of doing so. Everyone who plays here has options about disclosure. I have had email exhanges with SLindsey and Cyclist and have no fears about interchange with anyone else.

one is not a coward because they do not reveal their names on here, a prudent person believes that discretion is the better part of valor. That is why some of us meet for coffee in a very public place, so we can put real faces to the blogging names. Interestingly enough, we go by our blogging names when we meet.

It's not easy being the carbonunit

lost his position because a very nasty person, who claimed to be a good Christian pumped him for enough info so she could be sure who he was and got him fired. He is one of our smartest and nicest bloggers and certainly didn't deserve it. He is a better person than I think I would have been if the situation was reversed. Then, too, Hutch didn't they try to go after you through your military service---there are some nasty, jealous people out there--let's hope they aren't any worse than that, even though that is bad enough. Better to have a blogging name and if you make friendships your want to carry farther, i.e., e-mails, phone calls etc, than that is an individual decision. I know I would not want some people on here to know who I am--must say tho' about the only thing I could lose would be SS and Medicare and it looks like the gov't may do that with no help from anyone on here. As Carbon said "Discretion is the better part of valor." Why take chances?--only makes you smart and no way a coward.

Ditto. The internet can be a very dangerous medium, especially for women. Besides, my first name - Shannon - was taken when I created my user name, so I went with the middle name (and my favorite time of day).

"That it will never come again is what makes life so sweet."
- Emily Dickinson

But it isn't that bad. I don't need to eat, poop or sleep.
Better yet - no taxes and no fear of death. And no insurance premiums.

Still, I love PTC and don't want selfish foolish people like Mitchell destroying it. Nor do I want Logsdon-style politicans coming in as enablers.

I sort of like the all-ladies idea in November, but the little Realtor and the toothy envionmentalist have said some stupid things. Hope they recover. I can't - smoking got me, you know.

Gee, all those bennies. Move to Chicago and you can vote too. Probably many besides Chicago, but that's the only one that came to mind.

Just pointing out to the super brave les that we could sign any name we wanted and he wouldn't know the difference.

I yam what I yam....Popeye

That handles the detractors and I for one am proud of what you have done and what you will do for the city.

But, Keller Williams never gives up. The recruiters still think they will get an override on evrything their recruits make - forever. They actually portray this as a retirement account for the recruiter. Funny, but true.

Sorry for the diversion - give Connie my best and stick to your principles - as I know you will.

And yes sir, I will be at the Rotary Forum - in front.

I have seen a couple of candidates challenged about potential conflicts and some discussion. Maybe what the law says on the issues will put some to rest:

----------

ARTICLE III. CODE OF ETHICS*

Immediate family means spouse and children.

Interest means any direct or indirect pecuniary or material benefit accruing to a public officer or employee as a result of a contract or transaction, which is or may be the subject of an official act or action by or within the city. This does not, however, include those contracts or transactions which by their terms and by the substance of their provisions confer the opportunity and right to realize the accrual of similar benefits to all other persons and/or property similarly situated. Examples of interest include, but are not limited to, situations involving:

(1) Any person in the immediate family of the official, employee, appointee, or volunteer;
----------

As well on Callula Hills an important question is being missed. That of would candidates rezone any property to residential in the Industrial Park?

Not all are aware that Pathways does not own just the Callula Hills parcel, but that parcel and the 3 adjoining, none of which, including the Callula Hills site, are under the Pathways name directly, but under some of their divisions. Pathways has several divisions, but all answer to Pathways.

We don't need any of the Park's property rezoned to residential, not just the Callula Hills proposed site.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor
DonHaddix.com

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that PCDC (regardless of which name Mitchell uses) is dedicated to busting the land use plan wide open and rezoning every bit of the industrial park he owns or controls to residential. Residential, for the young and inexperienced - costs the city money; industrial earns the city money. One is good for the city, the other is bad for the city. Only advantage is to the landowner who gets more money faster - so his needs directly oppose what is best for the city.

Anyway, Don when they bring this stupid Callula Hills thing back for the expected 3-2 approval vote, ask them to sign a pledge that they do not intend to rezone any other industrial property for 10 years - or something like that to put a spotlight on their true intentions. Probably won't faze the big 3, but it will sure make Boone and Plunkett retired.

On ethics and Dyer, I just don't see the conflict or problem now that he has come out opposed to Mitchell's duplicity. I mean who should know better what scum he is than his own wife who has worked for him (sort of for 20 years? I think it is poor judgment for her to stay at Home Source, but poor judgment in one's personal career is not an ethical violation. I think Dyer should get credit for being a hard worker, a concerned citizen and a local hero for being a volunteer firefighter. His opponent seem to have her own conflict - not an ethical one, but an intellectual one having to do with a clear understanding of property rights. Read her stuff about how she would control the marketplace. Makes Prexbo look almost harmless.

It was obvious to me that Callula was just a first step for a potential domino of residential through that whole 'region,' using Dyer's term.

I am hoping the Callula issue does not return this year. Logsdon still would have the reality of his Insurance race being impacted by a vote for this proposal. A number of people have vowed to do a state wide effort to derail him totally if he voted for it.

On the ethics, Robert, it does not matter what Dyer says. He legally has a conflict of interest which Fleisch does not. He would have to recuse himself from any participation in Callula or any Pathways residential proposals, minimum, that comes before Council. It is a simple legal fact he cannot evade and a misdemeanor crime with a $500.00 fine if he tried.

Also I believe you are missing how Dyer handled this on his website. He said he opposed Callula, but Callula is the existing proposal only. He did not say he opposed any residential rezoning nor did he say if Callula was replanned to take those ten homes out of the most contested area he would not then find it acceptable. What he said was there was plenty of land in the 'region' for home building, not defining region, which could be the non runway part of the parcel currently in question along with any of/or the other three parcels. That semantically phrased statement stuck out like a sore thumb to me.

Before leaving Council I tasked Staff to bring the Airport Overlay up to date. It was inadequate as in not having proper development zones working outward from the airport, which by other airport overlays would bar residential from any of Pathways parcels and similarly located parcels.

As well he thinks Big Boxes are good, but again tried to semantically phrase it like a page from the playbook of Logsdon or Plunkett.

Does he deserve credit for being volunteer fireman? Absolutely! But that alone does not make him the best candidate. As well he ceases to be a volunteer fireman if elected, yet another conflict issue defined by law.

As for the land use comments by Fleisch, I have not researched them for legality. I know there have been moratoriums and restrictions legally put in other places and upheld by the Supreme Court. So, if she were elected and wanted to pursue such she would have to pursue the legal research first.

Developers frequentky cite the 5th Amendment incorrectly. That protects against loss of property value, it does not guarantee the right of gain of property value or any usage.

I do not know Dyer's wife. Might be on fine lady. But that is not the issue here. The issues are the legalities, positions and that either Dyer or Fleisch will be elected.

The forums should be interesting. 15 total candidates.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor
DonHaddix.com

Morgan - Clueless implies something I am sure you don't mean.
Anyway, not sure I totally agree on the ethics thing with Dyer's wife, but I certainly concede that someone could see it differently and make a big deal about it. Same on his stance on rezoning.

So, the way I see it Les needs to answer 2 simple questions at the Rotary forum.
1. Would you oppose all rezonings that do not fit the land use plan and limit big box approvals to less than 50,000 feet?
2. What real estate company will Connie be working for next year?

Surely that should handle it. The conflict would certainly go away if Connie left PCDC before Les was able to actually vote on anything.

Normally I wouldn't care about stuff like this, but Les' only opponent has really shot herself in her tiny little foot by proposing an unbelievable idea for limiting commercial approvals - see her 9/22 letter in the Letters section. Her idea is so bad, I'd rather see Calligula Hills approved than her idea - well not really, but almost.

Too late. Once you posted it was locked.

As I said, not a matter of opinion on the ethics, Robert. He has a legal conflict that cannot be escaped.

What Connie does is her business, not mine. Les has stated she does not intrude on his decisions so I would think that what he does should not intrude on her decision making as well. But that is between them, but does reflect why the law is written as it is. Being married 37 years I would not even try to suggest that what is part of my wife's life does not impact my life, but that is me.

Big Boxes are things over 32,000 sq', not 50,000, Village, not regional stores, and Dyer has already taken a pro stance, same as Plunkett's. Fleisch has taken an against stance, like mine.

As for Fleisch's positions, I don't know if what you don't like is legal or not. If not legal it will go no where. If legal up to her to propose.

But I do know there is more to an election than one or two issues. All the candidates need to be clear on a number of key issues, not parsed or semantically qualified, which is happening.

Cannot resist. Telling someone your real name is Robert W. Morgan? Said with sincerity as well.

Don Haddix
Candidate for Mayor
DonHaddix.com