Former city councilmember Mickey Sandifer is running for mayor. It would be, IMHO, catastrophic if he were to succeed.
Now this might be a little longer read than what I usually post here, but please read it and not just skim thru it.
Mickey comes across as warm and fuzzy and very sincere and believable in what he says. Talk to him about an item affecting the city that you are in favor of. Then have a friend, relative, neighbor (not living too close to you and definitely without the same last name) talk to him about the same item, but their opinion is opposite of yours. Then compare notes with them. A double whopper with cheese and bacon says he will agree with both folks. Take it a step further, email him and ask him where he stands on a particular item. He will contact you and attempt to discuss the item with you over the phone or in person. Another double whopper with double cheese and double bacon says he won't respond via email. Believe it has something to do with the written word being a way to be held accountable.
He says he believes in transparency. That's a laugh. Many years ago we had a member of the council from Ward 3 who would use the "Miscellaneous Council Items" at a council meeting to literally attack members of the public. Whether that person had spoken at the meeting earlier that evening, or not. In those days that section of the meeting was "reserved" for council comments. So what happened? One evening yours truly got up in business from the floor and suggested that Policy Statement 7 be amended to allow for citizen comments in the miscellaneous council items portion. Eventually staff brought forth the proposed changes to PS-7 for the council to review and act. Sandifer stated at the meeting he saw no need to allow citizens to address councilmember's comments during that portion of the meeting. The changes passed anyway.
Now let's talk about Mickey taking three (3) vacations a year paid for with your tax dollars. The National League of Cities (which we don't belong to any more) holds two meetings a year and the Kansas League of Municipalities holds one. What Mickey would do is go out the day before the meetings started, stay thru the last hail and farewell morning meeting and then come back the following day. The result: two extra hotel nights and the corresponding per diem. Most of the other council members who would go, they had a one or two night stay, Mickey would have a 4 or 5 night stay. I didn't pull them all, but I have posted some of the expense reports on this blog. Mickey was always the biggest spender except for one meeting.
One of his most egregious acts with regards to these out of town excursions happened the year he did not run for reelection. By not filing in June to run again he knew he was off the council at the end of the year. Yet he signed up for and went to the NLC meeting which was held just weeks before the end of his council term. Talk about a lame duck. In more ways than one, pretty lame.
Another time on one of the NLC trips to Washington, DC he took his very young granddaughter with him. I have NO problem with that. The problem I have is which of the three choices listed did Mickey choose:
1. Attend the meetings that he was supposed to go to and bring her with him? Sure and have this youngster sit very quietly and attentively during these sessions? Yeah, right.
2. Leave her in the room while he attended the meetings? Hmmmm, not a good idea, at least in my book.
3. Go to the meeting session, sign in to indicate he showed up, then immediately leave and take the grandchild sightseeing?
A triple whopper with cheese and bacon says it was probably number three. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Numbers one and two don't make sense.
When Mickey was on the council he was, IMHO part of the group that abrogated their responsibility as elected reps of the people and just rubber stamped anything and everything that was brought before them.
And last but not least. Remember when the former council passed the non-discrimination ordinance? Mickey was conveniently absent from the meeting and therefore did not cast a vote for or against the item. Mr. Two Face was in a pickle. If he had voted for it he would have alienated a majority of those folks who share the same religious background as him. If he voted against it he would have been accused of being homophobic by the LGBQT+ community and their supporters. So, how did Mr. Two Face handle it? He came up with some bovine scatalogical excuse for not showing at the meeting. And he says he is a leader. That's a laugh. If he were elected mayor, who would be pulling his puppet strings?
Dr. Mike Kemmling has worked diligently as a member of the council to get three years of mill levy reductions passed, to review projects in a manner that staff would then reanalyze them and get them done at a lower cost to the citizens. Dr. Mike tells it like it is. Sandifer tells you whatever you want to hear.
IMHO, Kemmling for mayor. Knowledge, experience and a new generational approach to move the city forward.
