Former Council Members Can't Handle Rejection

 On Monday, 12/21/20 the KC Star ran an article about the political divide in Shawnee, Kansas.  Various individuals were quoted for the article.

Two that stand out for the volume of their quotes were former council members Stephanie Meyer and Jeff Vaught.  Apparently these two have a problem in handling rejection.  

They were quite critical about the fact that recent local elections have resulted in the increase of individuals who lean towards a conservative philosophy on the city council.  Would they have been as critical if the elections had gone the other way?  I doubt it.  They say they are concerned because local elections are supposed to be non-partisan.  Golly gee, that just means that there is no party affiliation listed on the ballot.  Can candidates and elected officials really be non-partisan?  These two jokers are whacky.  People run for office based on what they want to accomplish (their agendas).  And when elected they push those items.  And that means that the only time someone having an agenda is bad is when that agenda runs counter to yours.  Do I smell a little hypocrisy here?

These two pillars of pomposity apparently can't get over rejection.  They both were strong advocates for the Shawnee Community Center which went down in a city wide election 72%-28%.  Meyer lost in her bid to become mayor of Shawnee.

Vaught has a more colorful history of losses (and some victories).  Let's start with the fact that he was elected to the city council in 2009 and reelected in 2013.  Now it gets interesting.  He ran in 2015 in a four way primary election for mayor.  He did not make the cut, so he never got to the general election.  City wide he was not in the top two.  What was interesting is how the voters of Ward III (his ward) rejected him as shown by just that ward's results:

Distler   229  26.29%

Pflumm 216  24.80%

Segale   145  16.65%

Vaught  261  32.26%

Translation:  2/3 of the electors in his ward did not want him as mayor.  Were they finally seeing that his concepts were not what they wanted?

Now let's move on to 2017.  There was a three way primary for his council seat in Ward III.  Again, he did not finish in the top two.  Whoops, were the voters in Ward III, rejecting him? Again!!!  Had they had enough of his philosophy and braggadocio?  What were the numbers?

Adrian    415   31.16%

Myres     609   45.72%

Vaught    308   23.12%

Wow, almost 8 out of 10 voters in his ward told him to hit the road.  

Is it at all possible that the voters in Shawnee do want change from the philosophies of folks like Meyer and Vaught?

The Story Behind "I'll Be Home For Christmas"

 Many folks are not aware of how this holiday favorite came to be.

Here is some info from Wikipedia:

"I'll Be Home for Christmas" is a Christmas song written by the lyricist Kim Gannon and composer Walter Kent and recorded in 1943 by Bing Crosby, who scored a top ten hit with the song. Originally written to honor soldiers overseas who longed to be home at Christmas time, "I'll Be Home for Christmas" has since gone on to become a Christmas standard.  The song is sung from the point of view of a soldier stationed overseas during World War II, writing a letter to his family. In the message, he tells the family he will be coming home and to prepare the holiday for him, and requests snow, mistletoe, and presents on the tree. The song ends on a melancholy note, with the soldier saying, "I'll be home for Christmas, if only in my dreams".The flip side of the original recording (Decca 18570B) was "Danny Boy" 

So, this holiday season please take a minute and think about our troops, some overseas, some stateside, who will not be home for Christmas.......but "only in their dreams".

Personal memories, Long Binh, 1967.

The video below is from 2019

Example of a Dumb COW

 Let's talk about how a COW (council member from other ward) made a big mistake.

By now most folks are familiar with the fact that the proposed apartment building for the old Wonderscope property was turned down.  

Here is what I was told.  The neighbors that banded together naturally expressed their opinions with their council reps (Ward 2).  And that is the way it should be.  On the other hand, remember that when the council votes, regardless of which ward the council member was elected from, that council member is voting for the whole city.  Yes, including the area where the building was proposed to go.

Apparently, the folks that were against the project asked for a meeting with Matt Zimmerman, from Ward 1.  The neighborhood folks wanted to at least present their opinions to him, knowing that when he would vote it would  affect them.  Supposedly he told them to "contact your council rep" and refused a meeting.  Dumb, stupid and arrogant, IMHO.  Regardless of which ward the project is in, council reps need to at least hear what the citizens in that ward have to say.  Why?  Because how they vote on the council will affect those folks.  Now, they may not agree with those citizens but they sure as heck ought to at least listen to them.

Those citizens who he ignored can't vote for or against him in the next election (should he choose to run again).  But, they sure could do certain things that are legal to help an opponent of his.

Time to Discuss COWs Again (Councilmembers from Other Wards)

 I've written about this subject before, and feel that with a city council election coming up in about a year (or sooner if there are primaries) it needs to be discussed again.

What is a COW?  Shawnee has four council wards.  Each ward has two council members. 
So, each citizen has 6 COWs.  Council members from other wards.

Let's switch for a second to the US Congress.  We here in Kansas might have an interest in a bill that is before Congress.  Naturally we would express our feelings to our rep.  At the same time we might contact, oh let's say a Texas rep and express our feelings (for passage or decline).  Because when the Congress meets as a whole they are voting for the whole country.

Same thing with our city council.  The members may represent a particular ward, but when they are on that dais and vote, they are voting for the entire city.  And that is why council members need to listen to citizens who may contact them, even if they are outside of their ward.  An example:  For argument's sake let's say some citizens of Ward 2 have an issue and want some support, besides from their reps, but from other council members.  So, let's say they contact a council member from Ward 1.  but that member doesn't want to be bothered with them because they are not in that member's ward.  Big mistake.

See, all citizens from all wards have the right to support or voice non-support for candidates in any of the four wards.  They can't vote outside their ward, but they can contribute to a candidate that they approve of.  They can even volunteer to distribute literature, make phone calls, etc.  So, when a council member from one ward turns a deaf ear to a citizen or group of citizens from another ward they are making a big mistake.  They may not agree with them, but they should not turn their arrogant noses up at them.  They need to at least listen.  Remembering that how they vote on the dais will affect those other citizens.

My previous comments on this subject:

https://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2018/12/do-you-know-who-your-cows-are.html

https://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2015/03/its-important-to-support-good-cows.html

 https://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2013/02/dealing-with-cow.html

https://shawneeray.blogspot.com/2012/01/dealing-with-cows.html

Trash Containers Being Pulled

 It's happening!!!  

Tuesday at around noon two 53' trailers were seen loading those trash containers up at Splash Cove to get them out of the city.  Good, go store them somewhere else.  And just as important, don't bring the used items back here to be stored at Splash Cove and/or Shawnee Town 1929.

For background see my posts below of 11/10, 11/14 & 11/15.

I would venture a guess that this change came about because some members of the governing body paid attention to what was happening. They realized that the citizens of the city had a valid complaint.  And they realized that city staff works for the governing body, not the other way around.

We have two council members in particular that need to go bye bye.  One is up for reelection in 2021. If she decides to run again we will have to do whatever is legal to stop her from being re-elected.  The other one is up again in 2023.  Can the city survive?  Maybe we should consider action under K.S.A. 25-4318 et seq