Party Lines: What’s behind flap over Bountiful ethics?
Aug 11, 2009 | 476 views | 6 
| 14 
| 
| 
| 14 | |
To better prepare for this column I have re-read most of the articles and letters to the editor on this issue. And, to be upfront and transparent I need to assert that the opinions expressed here belong to me, and are not the official opinion of the state or county Democratic Party.
On Tuesday Sept. 15, 2009 I will cast my ballot to re-elect Mayor Joe Johnson and here’s why. I first started to get to know Mayor Johnson when I ran for the Davis County Commission in 2006.
From that initial meeting I found that Mayor Johnson was a man I could trust. We may disagree on some issues, but my relations with the mayor have always been respectful and he is easily accessible.
The same is true of city council members Beth Holbrook and Marc Knight.
Their strengths are their true intent to serve the residents of Bountiful, their willingness to listen to all sides of an issue, their accessibility, and the fact that they understood that a little compromise was a good thing in granting the El Matador a beer license since a restaurant is NOT a tavern or watering hole.
I am sure that Jeff Novak and JoAnn Hamilton are good people who happen to think that their opinions represent the majority, but in reality they actually only represent a very vocal minority.
Their strength is their commitment to family and children, but the divisive nature of their politics is one of the great problems I see in the modern political system and I think we can all agree that the days of this type of political mudslinging has come and past.
I applaud Jeff Novak and JoAnn Hamilton for expressing their opinions and for their community service, but Mayor Johnson and the council has a better understanding of the community as a whole.
It is my experience that Mayor Johnson is a ethical man, and because of that he will get my vote this year — and that is also why I will support both Marc Knight and Beth Holbrook if they choose to run for the council again when their current terms are up.
Postings are not edited and are the responsibility of the author. You agree not to post comments that are abusive, threatening or obscene. Postings may be removed at the discretion of davisclipper.com
|
Facebook and Twitter: |
|
|
A good Mayor and council need to be open and fair and should have nothing to hide. There will always be difficult issues to debate and all parties involved need to be honest and interested in finding solutions that resolve the problems and create unity and strength in our community.
Due the "control" position of the Mayor to which he was elected it looks as though he thinks he is in a position to get things done and do whatever it takes to achieve the objectives he feels are in the best interest of our community without taking our interests into consideration unless we agree with him. If there are objections to the direction that he his staff and council they are taking they just fight harder and pull some strings. If you know the right people and have been around long enough you can get anything done. Right or wrong. Well that's not right. I don't agree with the Mayor and the direction he is taking this city. Bountiful city residents have paid plenty of tax in support of issues we don't agree with. Unfortunately those whom we elect don't always continue in the direction they were going when we elected them. As a whole we are an upstanding community with strong faith and values. Honesty being key. I support a different direction. Two terms is long enough.
You say that JoAnn Hamilton’s opinions do not represent the majority. If you are referring to the beer issue I beg to differ. I was at the public hearing where 7 people came supporting the license and 90 Bountiful residents came in support of repelling it. Of those who spoke at the public hearing, 4 supported granting the license, perhaps 20 spoke against it. Of the 4 who were for the license 1 was a Bountiful resident, 1 was the restaurant owner, 1 was a waitress at El Matador, I don’t recall who the other was (but perhaps you reviewed my letter to the editor at that time.) Of those who spoke against it their reasons were for the safety of pedestrians and because national statistics show that any loosening of laws allowing alcohol results in increased alcohol consumption especially among youth. Not because the go to El Matator, but that they perceive alcohol consumption is ok.
I did not attend the state hearing, but the numbers were similar to the local public hearing. To have that many people make time to have their voice heard is astounding. I would like to know how you think a majority of people in Bountiful prefer that the license was issued. Truly, perhaps you have information I have not come across.
I want to restate however, my qualm is not with the license. My qualms are
1) Laws were broken (see footage of the state hearing for evidence)
2) the city council and mayor did not behave ethically (they could have told the people up front that they had already promised the license but failed to do their research that if they would only build at the other side of the parking lot there would have been no need for the (illegal) change in our current policy.
3) They ignored the voice of the people that spoke with a strong majority against changing the policy and granting the license.
For me, it's not a matter of whether he's doing a bad job, good job, or great job (which I'm sure other people could argue about). For me, it's about establishing a sense of community by giving each other the opportunity to hold leadership positions, create new programs that are important to different groups than our current leadership, and decreasing the chance of isolating people's ideas that aren't the same as our Mayor. There is wisdom in sharing the opportunity to lead both as the Mayor and in our City Council. I believe the right leader for me is someone who see's wisdom in leaving after 2 terms. I really don't care if he has been the greatest Mayor Bountiful has ever had. I would argue that if he truly had the right perspective, he would know that history shows that the longer a leader stays in power, the more chance of corruption and skewed perspectives creep in.
Thanks for your article and to JusticeNow for writing in his thoughts. I would love to know if our current Mayor runs as a republican or democrat? Not that I would think he was a second class citizen if he was, but it would sure help me understand his platform better. Which would make sense that you support him as the Democratic Chair.
Thank you.
Thanks for your response. You are correct when you stated, "I'm sure your purpose is 100% non-biased, but in my experience there's always a reason why endorsements are made."
There is a reason, and the reasons are in the article. No money has been exchanged between Mayor Johnson and me, and the Mayor has granted me no favors.
I endorsed Mayor Johnson because I believe in the man, and I think he does a great job.
However, I do agree that the residents of Bountiful would go to the debates and make an informed choice. Having run for the county commission a few years back I was surprised by the low attendance at candidate debates.
I do disagree that endorsements don't matter. When I ran for vice chair of the Utah State Democratic Party the endorsements I received helped a virtual nobody win. With that said it is my hope that my endorsement of Mayor Johnson doesn't hurt him. After all, I am a proud Utah Democrat which in Davis is sometimes regarded as being a second-class citizen.
Thanks again for your comment and best of luck with your candidate (but not too much luck -- LOL!)
Rob Miller
Davis County Democratic Chair
Thank you for your thoughts. However, I would hope the citizens of Bountiful City will listen to a debate between Jeff Novak and Mayor Johnson before they make a decision solely on an endorsement from you or anyone else. After being involved myself in political issues of the past, I have been trying to steer people away from listening to 'endorsements' and go straight to the candid.
I'm sure your purpose is 100% non-biased, but in my experience there's always a reason why endorsements are made.
As I got involved in last years Senate race, one of the candidates mentioned in the debate that he was encouraged by someone who endorsed him to take the endorsers money and try and stay clear of feeling obligated to that person or company. Personally, I don't believe that can be done. If you are endorsed by someone, particularly when moneys given, there is always a sense of obligation when issues in the future arise that you are expected to side on the endorsers side. I have seen too much of that to believe that a simple endorsement is all it is, a simple endorsement.
I would encourage everyone to meet both candidates. And PLEASE do not vote for someone based on endorsements or because they have been in the office before.
Thank you!