VOTING TIPS FOR ALL VOTERS
The following are some important voting tips, regardless of your party affiliation or preferred ideology. Election fraud is real, and especially after experiencing the gross mismanagement of the city of Aspen's May 2009 municipal election, you can never be too careful. (Thankfully, this November's election is being coordinated by the Pitkin County Clerk, Janice Vos Caudill, in her elected role. She and her professional staff meticulously and tirelessly work to adhere to the specific rules and regulations of the Colorado Secretary of State. How refreshing!)
- Confirm your voter registration and precinct HERE.
- Use blue or black ink.
- DO NOT vote by Mail-In ballot. Whenever possible, go to your precinct polling place and vote in person, and on a paper ballot if given the option. Mail-In ballots always cause a disproportionate number of problems. The farther Mail-In ballots travel and the longer they wait around to be counted, the higher the chance of mischief or accident.
- DO NOT avoid voting on the retention of judges, even if you neither know nor care about who they are or how they dispense "justice." By not explicitly voting NO on each "Shall [judge] be retained" question, you are implicitly voting YES to keeping him/her on the bench. Unless you personally know a given judge to be honest and fair (ie. non-activist), then vote NO on retention.
- Inform yourself about the Candidates and Issues before November 2. This issue of The Red Ant is intended to give you MY opinions. I encourage you to gather other input as well.
- Take a cheat-sheet into the voting booth. I have included a ballot (below) for you to print and take with you to the polls.
- (The Red Ant acknowledges election integrity advocate Daniel Martin of Longmont, candidate for Boulder County Clerk, for these important voting tips.)
VOTE EARLY
Early voting begins next week on October 18 in the County Clerk's office. From M-F, October 18-22 and 25-29, you can vote early between 8:30a - 4:30p. There is no early voting on Monday, November 1. The County Clerk's office is located at 530 E. Main Street, in the square building just to the east of the Court House. For more information on the November 2 election visit www.PitkinVotes.org
THE POLLS
The polls open at 7am on Election Day, Tuesday, November 2, 2010. Bring
your photo identification!!
YOUR PRECINCT
Precincts 1, 2, & 3 Rio Grande Room - 455 Rio Grande Place, Aspen
Precinct 4 Crossroads Church of Aspen - 726 W. Francis Street
Precinct 5 Health & Human Services Bldg - 0405 Castle Creek Rd
Precinct 6 Snowmass Village Town Hall, 130 Kearns Road
Precinct 7 Colorado Mountain College - 225 Sage Way, AABC
Precinct 8 Old Snowmass Fire Station - 1909 Snowmass Creek Rd
Precinct 9 St. Peter's of the Valley - 0200 Elk Run Drive, Basalt
Precinct 10 Church of Redstone - 213 Redstone Blvd., Redstone
THE RED ANT ENDORSEMENTS
In full disclosure, I am a registered Republican. In this election, however, it is my fierce Libertarian streak and fiscal conservatism that drive me. I do not believe "the fundamental transformation of America" that has occurred over the past 21 months has been good for anyone. And contrary to popular pre-2008 local belief, Aspen is NOT immune to economic downturns. In most cases, my inclinations are to throw the incumbent bums out.
This is also the right opportunity for me to once again remind readers that The Red Ant is an editorial piece. The opinions are mine, and solely mine. But, as expected from The Red Ant, I have given them considerable research and thought.
I do not cover every issue on the November ballot, however, HERE is the link for a sample ballot of the candidates and the issues, marked with ALL of my endorsements. You can print this and take it with you to the polls.
Readers, if you have never clicked on a link in The Red Ant, today is THE DAY to do just that! Take a minute to visit the revealing website www.HitTheRoadJackJ.com and witness BOCC candidate Jack Johnson in action and in his own words. You won't believe what you see! Announced just 5 days ago, the site has already received over 1600 hits. (A public service, proudly underwritten by The Red Ant.)
THE LOCAL ISSUES
- Referendum 2A: 1% Lodging Tax NO ~ YES?
This proposed tax of an additional 1% on lodging rentals within the city of Aspen is expected to generate $1 million annually and the funds will be exclusively dedicated to the promotion of tourism.
Proponents continually state that this is a tax that locals won't pay. The Red Ant thinks this is a lousy rationale for encouraging voters to support the measure. Sticking it to the very people without whom we wouldn't be the world-class resort destination we are is simply not good campaign rhetoric. A better way to promote the measure would be to explain that our current combined 10% lodging and sales tax would become 11% if the measure passes, and, in these rough economic times, the power of additional marketing dollars could make a measurable difference in our local economy.
The Red Ant additionally worries that the Aspen Chamber Resort Association (ACRA) will be the stewards of this marketing windfall. They are contracted by the city to market this destination for the spring, summer and fall. (Aspen Skiing Company primarily handles the winter marketing.) A million bucks is a big chunk of change to be under ANY purview of the city, especially given their lousy record of financial responsibility. I worry about the degree of influence the city will have over ACRA on spending decisions, primarily because the Aspen Daily News reports that "city council would make the decision on how to spend the additional money." THAT scares the heck out of me!! I have been leaning NO for these reasons.
But my one sticking point in being absolute is that SkiCo's Senior VP David Perry is on the ACRA board. SkiCo totally gets marketing, does it extremely well and has shown impressive and measurable results from its efforts. With Perry's involvement (and potential oversight? Please?), $1 million could be a great boost for our local tourism economy. But clearly, this responsibility cannot be placed solely on his shoulders. Today I am leaning YES, but I am still thinking this one through. The city's and council's involvement is definitely a HUGE drawback. I'll be calling an audible on this one!
- Referendum 2B: Replace IRV with June Run-Off YES
Are you kidding? If you missed The Aspen Times' recent Sunday edition that exposed the city's horrific mismanagement of Aspen's first try at IRV, "Unlocking IRV: How Instant Run-Off Voting turned the May 2009 election into a 17-month fight," HERE it is. In short, the progressive voting experiment was a disaster from the get-go, and the legal wrangling will continue for the foreseeable future. Repeal it. And repeal it now. We should definitely "switch back to the run-off which produces an accurate count." (The Aspen Times 10/10/10.) Ya think?
- Referendum 3A: $1.35 million annual tax increase for schools NO
The Red Ant hates new taxes, especially new taxes where the justification for such taxes is stated as something like "This is a referendum on education in Aspen - what is best for our kids." No, this isn't a referendum on education in Aspen. It's to "compensate for state-mandated budget cuts and to offset anticipated reductions in property tax revenue due to falling property values," as reported by The Aspen Times. Period. So just say so! Tax increases for the schools generally pass in Aspen, but when board members use such ridiculous and dramatic rhetoric to justify putting a tax increase measure before voters in the current economic climate, I am going to vote NO.
Besides, if our schools need money, why don't we use the money that the city already has (before a new tax increase) that they've been wasting on granting themselves selfish raises, losing $475,000 earmarked for the recycling center, building emergency drainage ($2.3 million) for a reservoir that doesn't need it, and spending countless millions on planning and design for future phases of the Burlingame subsidized housing project that, if The Red Ant has anything to do with it, will NEVER come to fruition. I fully recognize that the city and school district are separate entities, but the leaders of each need to work together to find solutions across jurisdictional boundaries. Let's take the existing collaboration between the city and schools to a new level. There is already plenty of taxpayer money for our schools.
And another note: Aspen schools spend approximately $12,000 per student per year. The state average is $9,000. Vote NO on the tax increase.
- Referendums 5A & 5B: $50 million debt for Aspen Valley Hospital expansion NO AND NO
5A: This question, if approved, would make it possible for the hospital, as a special taxing district, to exceed its current revenue limits (as determined by Colorado's TABOR Amendment).
5B: I have written extensively on Aspen Valley Hospital's proposed expansion plans. For in-depth information and so as not to repeat myself, see Issue #44 and Issue #49. In short, a $50 million general obligation bond is a BAD IDEA at a BAD TIME for Aspen. And I personally believe that AVH leadership has been arrogant and aggressive by pushing these measures onto November's ballot. They're so confident, they haven't even bothered to campaign for this huge bond!
Between cash on-hand and revenue bond potential, AVH currently has $40 million to play with. The grand 4-phase expansion will cost (in today's best estimates) $120 million. AVH CEO David Ressler has gone on record stating that the remaining $80 million would be split evenly between philanthropic donations and general obligation debt financing. Last I checked, half of 80 is 40, but we have a $50 million bond question before us. Does this indicate that expected costs have risen $20 million to $140 million? Or does this imply that it is not possible now to raise $40 million through philanthropy (ya think?) and $30 million is the new (yet still overly ambitious) target? AVH isn't saying. A $50 million bond it is. This time.
The Red Ant says AVH could have better presented its expansion proposal to the voters by demonstrating the community's support (??) through impressive results of a robust and successful capital campaign. With money in hand, a general obligation bond to "complete" the project would have been a far more palatable consideration. Now, I fear that taxpayers are expected to front the first $50 million, and when (not if) the donations don't come in, we'll be hit up again and again until the 214,000 s.f. folly is done. To date, there is no capital campaign in place. (This is not a good election to be flying under the radar when asking the voters for $50 million.) Donations requests for the $30-40 million "philanthropic giving" component of the proposed expansion don't even make the Aspen Medical Foundation's "wish list," nor are they listed on the hospital fundraising organization's website under "community initiatives" or "how can I help." AVH knows where the easy free money comes from - You!!
It would seem that early reports of the AVH expansion had the number of patient beds increasing from 25 today to 36. But this number has recently been wiggling downward. (A recent press report now has the number at 27.) A mystery! And who loves a mystery more than The Red Ant? Investigative research shows that AVH is qualified (by federal standards) as a "rural access" hospital. The Medicare Rural Hospital Flex Program enables small hospitals to be licesnsed as "Critical Access Hospitals (CAH)" and offers grants to states to strengthen the rural healthcare infrastructure. AVH is indeed 1 of 29 CAHs in Colorado. To qualify, AVH must be located in a rural area (yes), be more than 35 miles from another hospital (yes, barely -Valley View Hospital in Glenwood is 40 miles away), offer 24-hour emergency care (yes), have a maximum of 25 acute care and swing beds (yes today, but no if the number increases). ("Swing bed" is a Medicare term for a bed that provides additional inpatient care for patients in transition from acute care to rehabilitation.) There are big financial benefits for CAHs: unlike urban and other rural hospitals, CAH's are notably reimbursed by Medicare on a cost+1% basis -- a remarkable boon for revenues!! Hmmm, that CAH cash might just be the incentive to quietly knock the $120 million expansion down by 11 beds!! But I digress.... Back to NO on 5A and 5B....
27,000 s.f. of doctor's office space, a three-story 236-space parking garage and 18 subsidized housing units are far far far more than we need. Who do you know who schedules elective procedures at AVH? Shouldn't we be the best community hospital we can be, have the best triage and airlift capacities, and take advantage of the wealth of medical centers on the western slope and in Denver? And that's not to mention that we have a fabulous new regional medical center down the road in Glenwood. With the $40 million already available, AVH should be able to nicely upgrade its aging facility. Say NO to the AVH expansion and the $50 million bond.
PITKIN COUNTY OFFICES
- Commissioner: District 1 ROB ITTNER
This is an easy one. This local restaurateur (Rustique Bistro) with a business/accounting degree employs over 25 people. He was a founding member of the Aspen Young Professionals Association and is a past president of the local chapter of the Colorado Restaurant Association. Rob is a member of Rotary, the ACRA marketing board and the Aspen Art Museum's Contemporaries group. In his spare time, this avid outdoorsman volunteers as a Big Buddy for The Buddy Program when he's not skiing, hiking or biking.
With actionable ideas such as a property tax rebate for business owners who pay a triple net lease and who don't lay-off workers during these challenging economic times, here's a businessman who gets it. When his opponent Jack Johnson learned of this novel concept, he responded, "I don't particularly think it's the government's business to create jobs." Johnson favors a different tact. "We could very well return this community to agriculture," he said at a summer candidates forum. Puh-lease.
The Red Ant is no fan of Jack Johnson, stemming from his days as a one-term councilman on Aspen's City Council. Known for his petulant demeanor toward the public, Johnson proudly touts his record, including leadership of the highly controversial overnight emergency Ordinance 30 for the involuntary preservation of all structures over 30 years old, and for bringing the misguided and hopefully soon-to-be-repealed Instant Run-Off Voting (IRV) method to Aspen. These were both big-time losing propositions for Aspen. The shocking real estate devaluations from Ordinance 30 are still unresolved and continue to affect property owners to this day.
Johnson says, "Let us vote and then let us shut up." On the other hand, Ittner says, "I make a living listening to people's concerns and acting on them. Having a transparent government and getting input from the people who the government represents is at the top of my list." Ittner is the right man with the right experience at the right time, hands down. Key local endorsements for Ittner: Tommy Clapper, Helen Klanderud, Brian Speck, Michael Behrendt. www.VoteRobIttner.com
- Commissioner: District 2 LEAVE BLANK
Incumbent Rachel Richards is running unopposed. The Red Ant doesn't like career politicians, regardless of their records. This will be Rachel's 2nd 4-year term on the Board of County Commissioners, following roles on city council and one term as mayor of the city of Aspen. She has been in local elected office for nearly 17 years since first being elected to the city council in 1991. In an effort to encourage local citizens to run for elective office, The Red Ant says, send the message that nobody is unbeatable. Leave the bubble blank.
- Sheriff: PATRICK "RICK" LEONARD
The Red Ant is sick and tired of the "old boy network" in local law enforcement. Twenty-three year sheriff's deputy and current Sheriff Bob Braudis' anointed one, Joe DiSalvo stands by the status quo of the department. Career lawman Rick Leonard, who retired to Basalt two years ago, has more than two decades of law enforcement experience in Florida and New York, where he specialized in investigative work in homicide and rape cases. Leonard knows law enforcement.
Leonard is a big advocate of cleaning up the local drug scene, even if this involves undercover investigations in certain circumstances. When Braudis and DiSalvo agree that our local drug problem is a health issue and not a criminal one, we are nothing but a sanctuary city/county for drug dealers. It's 2010. This mentality does not fly with The Red Ant.
Besides, the Pitkin County Sheriff's office is NOT a monarchy; there is NO heir apparent. It's time to clean house and clean up. Leonard for Sheriff. www.Leonard4Sheriff.com
COLORADO ISSUES AND OFFICES
- Amendments 60 & 61 and Prop 101: YES, YES AND YES These measures are definitely extreme, and mayor Mick says "the three" will never pass. But that is certainly not how I make my voting decisions. Win or lose, I want to be part of the electorate who sends a loud message to the state legislature that the public's tolerance for big government and wasteful spending has reached its limit. The focus of that message is that the government needs to adapt to the desires of the people rather than the other way around.
These three highly controversial ballot issues can be summarized as follows:
Amendment 60 deals with Property Taxes
· Restores fair, honest tax elections
· Stops taxation by unelected boards
· Replaces some school taxes with state aid
· Ends illegal tax hikes lacking voter approval
-> Property tax relief without reducing K-12 education funding; citizen control over government taxes; removal of the competitive advantage that publicly owned enterprises have over private businesses since they do not pay property taxes.
Amendment 61 deals with Government Borrowing
· Revives 1876 ban on state borrowing
· Requires voter approval before local borrowing
· Limits form, term and amount of borrowing
· Requires that tax rates be reduced after borrowing is repaid
-> Borrowing limits help ensure that borrowing costs do not reduce funds for future public services; fiscal restraint through a pay-as-you-go approach.
Proposition 101 deals with Tax Relief
· Cuts or eliminates taxes and fees on vehicle purchases, leases, rentals and registrations over the next 4 years
· Trims income tax rate from 4.63% to 4.5% in 2011, and to 3.5% gradually over time
· Ends taxes and fees (except for 911) on phone, pager, cable bills
· Requires voter approval to create or increase fees on vehicles or telecommunication services
-> Allows citizens and businesses to keep more of their own money; requires state and local governments to eliminate unnecessary spending; gives citizens a voice in decisions about fees on phones and vehicles by requiring the government to seek voter approval for additional funding rather than adding more fees.
These measures obviously drastically affect government revenues. The government will feel far more than a pinch in many cases. The savings to taxpayers will be phased in over 4-12 years or more. Opponents speculate that if all three measures pass, $5 billion will be cut from the total state/local spending budget over 10 years. Well, current state/local spending is $45.9 billion. If, in the opposition's worst case scenario, $5 billion was cut today from total spending, this still allows the SAME spending Colorado had in 2007 ($40.5 billion)!! I think we can handle this.
Opponents squeal that decreased government revenues will result in "8,000 teachers lost" and "huge class sizes." This is blatant nonsense and a horrible scare tactic. Any reduction to local school revenues as a result of the measures would be replaced by state revenues as required by law. Period. The measures will NOT affect the schools, just the source of funding.
"73,000 jobs will be lost and this will trigger a second recession," they cry. Yes, the measures would very likely reduce the number of jobs funded by taxes (this means government jobs -- this is a GOOD thing), but the money would remain with the private sector and could be used for private sector production and job growth. NOTE: The state budget is NOT the economy!
There will indeed be drastic reductions in discretionary spending budgets. This will force the government to make very hard decisions and will make it very difficult (if not impossible) for them to recklessly spend taxpayer dollars. For too long, our local government in Aspen/Pitkin County has gotten away with tax-and-spend programs because a large number of taxpayers cannot vote here. The passage of these measures will force the job-secure, over-paid, under-performing government workers to make sacrifices similar to those faced by ordinary citizens. The government will have to re-think its operations, become more productive and accept the pain that has been inflicted on us all.
Furthermore, contrary to opponents' fear-mongering, there WILL still be bonding for roads, schools and water projects. It's just that governments will need voter approval to borrow money. These measures are extreme for sure. But extreme times require extreme measures. Besides, when has government ever reigned itself in??
This proposed amendment to the Colorado Constitution deals with health care choice. It's probably no surprise to learn that The Red Ant is no fan of ObamaCare, so when a measure that stands to amend the Colorado Constitution to include health care choice as a constitutional right, prohibit the state from requiring or enforcing any requirement that a person participate in a public or private health care plan, and restricts the state from limiting a person's ability to make or receive direct payments for lawful health care services, I am all in. YES on 63.
- Secretary of State: SCOTT GESSLER
This race pits Gessler, an election law expert, against the incumbent who is known for his aggressive efforts to thwart transparency and election integrity reforms. Gessler, a former federal prosecutor and Army reservist, has a proven track record of fighting for fair and open elections. He successfully fought to ensure open access to Colorado's ballot for Republicans, Democrats and third-party candidates. He has led the fight in striking down unconstitutional campaign finance laws. He has defended First Amendment cases against attempts to restrict free speech. He also fought efforts by the Colorado Reapportionment Commission to politically gerrymander state Senate and House districts in 2002. I know Scott Gessler personally and have for years. He is an honest broker if there ever was one. Election integrity is vital for the credibility of our democracy. The Secretary of State's decisions have very real consequences for our lives and prosperity. Vote for Scott Gessler. www.ScottGessler.com
- State Senate: District 5 BOB RANKIN
As a small business leader, Bob Rankin actually knows how to run a business. He believes Colorado's biggest challenge is creating jobs and expanding our economy. Now Bob Rankin is ready to bring his expertise to the Colorado State Senate. Bob knows you don't expand the economy by growing the size of government. And he understands that we're not going to create jobs by increasing taxes on Coloradans or tying up small businesses with red tape. An advocate for competent government (better, not bigger), protection of individual rights, support of business success, constitutional restraint and fiscal sanity (lower taxes and balanced budgets), Bob Rankin is THE choice for State Senate. www.RankinForSenate.com
- State Representative: District 61 WRITE IN "KATHLEEN CURRY"
Currently our incumbent, Kathleen Curry, fed up with divisive party politics, decided last year that in order to best represent her constituency, she should formally declare her independence. (District 61 is comprised of 53,000 voters: 42% unaffiliated, 31% Democrats and 26% Republicans.) Party control of the election process has forced Curry to run for re-election as a write-in candidate -- incredibly challenging, even for this hugely popular representative. I respect and value Kathleen Curry's belief in putting principle above party politics. She clearly cares more about the interests of her constituents than being a star in the Democratic Party. Few politicians would voluntarily be stripped of powerful positions on committees to be relegated to the back row of House chambers. We need more public servants with this kind of courage of their convictions.
The critical element of this particular race is to remember to WRITE IN "Kathleen Curry" AND color in the bubble beside that line. Key local endorsements for Curry: Patti & Tommy Clapper, Rachel Richards, Jack Hatfield. www.KathleenCurry.org
FEDERAL OFFICES
- United States Senator: KEN BUCK
This 2-time Weld County district attorney is running for the US Senate because of his "growing concern about the direction the administration and congress are taking our country." And who can argue with that? Buck's incumbent opponent, appointed by soon-to-be-former Governor Ritter in 2009, has been a rubber-stamp for big spending and big government, notably voting FOR the $800 billion stimulus bill although he admits he hadn't read it, voting FOR Obamacare and pledging his support for the public option, and admitting that he "wants to be for" cap and trade. Ken Buck promises NO MORE RUBBER STAMPS! The Buck stops here. www.BuckForColorado.com
- Congress: District 3 SCOTT TIPTON
Scott Tipton is a successful small businessman from Cortez, Colorado. Managing 22 people who he calls co-workers, Tipton attributes his success to his commitment to people, quality and customer service. Elected to the Colorado House of Representatives (58th district) in 2008 on a platform of creating jobs, ensuring the safety of Coloradans and improving the quality of life in the state, Tipton was named to the Agriculture, Livestock, Natural Resources and Local Government committees. Notably, Tipton sponsored legislation to protect our children from the worst criminal offenders by mandating harsher penalties for child sex offenders and allowing law enforcement to collect DNA evidence from suspects through Jessica's Law and Katie's Law. A fiscal conservative, Tipton disagrees with the reckless spending of our federal government. Tipton has vowed to bring common sense to Congress. www.VoteTipton.com
COLORADO JUDICIAL OFFICES
- Supreme Court: Michael Bender NO
- Supreme Court: Alex Martinez NO
- Supreme Court: Nancy Rice NO
- Court of Appeals: John Dailey NO
- Court of Appeals: Richard Gabriel NO
- Court of Appeals: Nancy Lichtenstein NO
- Court of Appeals: David Richman NO
- District Court - 9th Judicial District: Gail Nichols YES
- County Court - Pitkin County: Erin Fernandez-Ely YES
A DEBATE ON AMENDMENTS 60 & 61, AND PROPOSITION 101
The Aspen Business Luncheon will feature Debbie Schrum, Proponent, and Mathew Gray, Opponent, on Wednesday, October 27. This is a great opportunity to learn more about these ballot proposals. 12:15 at the St. Regis. Buffet lunch for $22. You must RSVP to AspenBusinessLunch@gmail.com to reserve your place.
COMMUNITY VOICES
This installment features the community voices of several government officials and their thoughts on Instant Run-off Voting.
- City Councilman Torre: "I hate IRV!" (9/13/10)
- City Councilman Dwayne Romero: "I initially voted for IRV. Now that we have gone through that little experiment, I no longer desire it as our voting procedure." (9/23/10)
- City Clerk Kathryn Koch: "I cannot recommend ranked choice (IRV) voting in a race with two seats up for election." (1/22/07)
- Former City Councilman and current BOCC candidate Jack Johnson: "I really don't care. I've told Rob Richie (IRV advocate from Fair Vote) for months that Aspen doesn't deserve IRV. It's too good a system for us. It's too intelligent and we really want to fight like the mean nasty selfish people we are." (11/24/09)
October 16