Letter: Delay is Delay
To the Editor:
After only two weeks, Leavenworth Nay Sayers got the County Commissioners to delete the county administrator question from the April 3, 2007 ballot and move it to the next general election in August 2008.
Commissioner (Clyde) Graeber opened the issue when he stated that people previously involved in the issue had expressed concern on not having ample time to campaign on the issue. Commissioner (Dean) Oroke stated he had received calls from persons opposed to an administrator. Commissioner (J.C.) Tellefson talked around the issue asserting the commissioners were involved in other business and did not have time to inform the public on the county administrator. Ethically, I am not sure that the commissioners should campaign either for or against this type issue. How an individual commissioner feels about an administrator is irrelevant; and in a public campaign, their individual voices carry too much weight. This is a voter issue and should be debated and campaigned by voter action groups. The commissioners get to function with the organization the voters give them.
For Commissioner Graeber, who needs more time, and for what? This issue was on the ballot last year, and has been arm-wrestled since 1984. Both sides know every detail. Delay is delay.
For Commissioner Tellefson, when will the commissioners ever have time to support this issue? There will always be important business before the commissioners that demands their time and attention. Perhaps if you had a county administrator to do the routine stuff, and to pull the county staff and everything together on big projects, you would have time to work issues such as an administrator. Delay is delay.
For Commissioner Oroke. It is easily apparent that you do not support a county administrator. But, all I have heard you say is that you "are not a quick decision maker." After 22 years how much more time do you need? And, it is hard to believe that everyone in south Leavenworth County is against this issue. How many negative calls did you get out of the 21,000 people in your district? Have you received no positive calls or statements, ever, on an administrator? Delay is delay.
When I spoke at the Jan. 22 Commission meeting supporting an administrator, I believe I presented facts to justify an administrator. I did not hear facts at the Feb.12 meeting when the commissioners removed the question from the ballot. What I heard was allusion (indirect reference), rhetoric (empty talk), and supposition (imagining something to be the case). After attending two commission meetings on the administrator, I am not sure who is being straightforward, and who may be talking out the side of their mouth. I do get the feeling there is a lot of backslapping, handshaking, and whispering going on in the back rooms.
If the voters approve an administrator at the August 2008 election, by Kansas Statute the commissioners would not have to appoint an administrator until six months later -- February 2009. Two more years! And, what assurances do we have that the commissioners will not delete the issue from that election. All it will take is another resolution. With Leavenworth County politics, who knows?
People come and people go, but the Nay Sayers are always here in Leavenworth. Delay is truly delay, and with delay, anything can happen!
More like this story
- USD 458 employee becomes 2015 district graduate
- Face to Face: USD 204 administrative assistant Stormi Vitt
- KanCare starting ombudsman volunteer program in 3 places
- International tragedy led to lasting local legacy for Boy Scouts
- Generating change: Ag Hall looks to reinfuse energy with Barnyard Babies event