Comments

akboy30 wrote on Feb 29, 2008 9:28 AM:

" Bruce- So you're going to attack her because the hotel her SON-IN-LAW owns has a bar? Janet own the Colony Inn, not the Valley Hotel. I don't even think the Colony Inn will let you order a glass of wine with your lunch. "




Bruce C Marden Sr wrote on Feb 28, 2008 9:25 PM:

" MEA has NO room for this kind of leader(JANET KINCAID) as she has not reported to the valley people about all the good work on the valley hotel. Were do we start the sale of beer, booze and done forget the smokes that sat next to the phone booth.Please look at ALL the good people that have been there drinking got drunk and put in jail or goes home to beat up on the rest of the house. She also was in on the remodelling job that sent ASBESTOS fibers all over the area with out a permit. "




Sandra White wrote on Feb 25, 2008 8:44 PM:

" Janet, I sincerely admire your tireless work on the behalf of our Valley community. I have always known you to be highly ethical, courageous and very, very smart. How lucky we are that you are willing to contribute your moxy and energy to our community. Yes-Kincaid. "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 25, 2008 12:24 PM:

" Dennis- I agree that the rules should more closely mirror APOC rules. However, I'm not so keen on the talk of the "spirit" of the bylaws. We can't really call people non-compliant when they follow the letter of the rules but not their spirit. As for the spirit of the bylaws, the section dealing with the Bylaws Committee says people will be appointed for three year terms. In reality, once people get appointed they just stay there with no subsequent re-appointment when their term is up. In this one, MEA isn't following the letter OR the spirit of the bylaws. "




Dennis wrote on Feb 25, 2008 7:12 AM:

" Akboy30: Yes, there probably does need to be some tweaking to the bylaws, they should be akin to APOC, where everyone and every group (including groups/unions communicating to their members)must register as a PAC. They must account for every dime in and out, and end the election with zero. There should also be civil, and if needed, criminal penalties for chronic violations, by anyone, on either side. That said, the spirit of the bylaws are: Report all contributions and expenditures used to influence an MEA election. I don't care which side they are on, everyone needs to follow the rules. "




Wasilla27 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 11:06 PM:

" Hey Denny, where's your outrage over $180,000 of OUR money being spent illegally by MEA management trying to influence the election? Oh, that's right. You have none. You're a two-bit attack dog for-hire, doing Carmony's dirty work. Nothing more.

Once Burchell and Kincaid are elected, you and your gang of thugs are gone. "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 10:43 PM:

" By the way, where do the MEA bylaws say anything about balancing contributions with expenditures? It doesn't, and it really should. Basic accounting really folks. Reading through the bylaws, there seem to be a number of things that should be explained, defined, or otherwise reworked. "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 10:37 PM:

" Dennis- Oh, one other thing...the forms they filed aren't actually blank...they just show that they haven't received any contributions. MEA bylaws really should be much more clear on this. Rather than saying that everyone has to report contributions and expenditures, they should also define exactly what a contribution is. When I give to a candidate or group, that's a contribution. When a group spends organizational funds from a general budget, that just doesn't really seem to fit any good definition of "contribution" (they're contributing their own money to their own organization doesn't seem right). "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 10:30 PM:

" Dennis- but the bylaws do say that you have to report contributions...have they actually received any? If not, and they are paying out of their own organization budget as they claim, would filing a revised report showing the transfer from their operating budget to the campaign budget satisfy? It doesn't actually tell us anything, other than that they are spending their own organization's money, but it would be completely accurate. Really, I suppose they should do that to clear up any misconceptions. And thanks Dennis...my mother taught me to be polite to everyone...she'd be pleased you noticed. "




Dennis wrote on Feb 24, 2008 9:45 PM:

" I didn't assume anything, I know it because the contribution forms they themselves filed were blank.
Even if they are an "organisation", their budget does not apply here. They must account for actual contributions to expenditures dollar for dollar, contributor by contributor in a separate account if necessary. There is no ambiguity here, it is cut and dried. And, by the way, I do appreciate your congeniality. You are not like the others, Thanks. "




kwb wrote on Feb 24, 2008 9:34 PM:

" I would have to agree that private organizations can speak to their own members no matter what MEA says. If MEA had any right to regulate those groups and their activities with their own members, I would be absolutely stunned. As soon as they start spending money to advocate to the public at large, they should absolutely have to file to do so. Otherwise, why isn't the Valley Republican Party being hauled up on non-compliance charges? They hold events for Jordan, send emails for Jordan, etc. "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 9:24 PM:

" Don't insult Dennis. Even though you may think he's a dimwit, insulting people doesn't really help. Like him or not, but at least he's out there talking about what he believes. Democracy...its a good thing. "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 9:21 PM:

" Dennis- Why do you assume that they filed a false report? Just because MEA says so? MEA bylaws say that you have to report your fundraising and your expenditures. Since the Ratepayers are a real actual organization with a real actual budget, how are you or MEA so sure that they did any fundraising at all for the election? "




Dennis wrote on Feb 24, 2008 9:05 PM:

" Correction: But that does NOT give you the right use it to justify the other's bad behaviour.

"




Dennis wrote on Feb 24, 2008 8:54 PM:

" Private or public makes no difference, they are attempting to influence the outcome of the election and have failed to file the proper paperwork. Well, how about the E-club, at least she filed all the required paperwork, giving you, a right to challenge her behavior. But that does give you the right to justify the other's bad behaviour. Why did it take 3 false filings from MEA Ratepayers before they (according to you) finally filed a true one? Why wasn't Janet/Peter getting there supporters to act appropriately? Maybe they just don't care how they get elected. "




Good Luck wrote on Feb 24, 2008 8:11 PM:

" Best wishes Janet. I mailed my ballot this weekend, if they don't throw it out, you and Burchell got my vote.
OK Dennis since you asked for it, You are a dimwit!
"




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 7:46 PM:

" And Dennis, I hope you don't feel that my sharing those facts was somehow an attack on you. Nothing could be further from the truth. "




akboy30 wrote on Feb 24, 2008 7:45 PM:

" Organizations like the firefighters' have every right to communicate with their members about anything they choose. Their cards were not ads for the public, but private member communication. The Ratepayers have already responded to MEA...interesting how their response doesn't get posted. How about the E-Club? The bylaws do say that only candidates can contribute more than $500 to a campaign, so where is the blacklisting of the E-Club after Ms. Miller's $4100 in contributions? Oh yes, she's on management's side...I forgot. "




Dennis wrote on Feb 24, 2008 6:27 PM:

" What a shame the groups supporting Kincaid/Burchell don't even have the class to file proper paperwork required by the MEA election by-laws. Why won't MEA Ratepayers disclose their contributions? Why won't IBEW, MSEA and the Firefighters Union even file the required election paperwork? How can these candidates stand by while groups supporting them flaunt the rules, all the while bragging about how they want to bring truth and transparency to MEA? Ha! What a bunch of hypocrites. We're far better off without these phonies. Now you can attack me instead of addressing the issue I have just raised. "




kwb wrote on Feb 24, 2008 2:00 PM:

" It's funny. The MEA management crowd and their supporters keep screaming "The IBEW's coming". They keep telling us to be afraid. They keep telling us how to vote and how to think. Something tells me that the MEA members may just know better. Thanks Janet for the letter...I agree that its a classy way to deal with the tacky attack ads. "




Concerned wrote on Feb 24, 2008 10:49 AM:

" Thanks for your tireless efforts on behalf of the community and our coop. You're a class act whom I sincerely hope to see seated, very shortly after being elected.
Yeah Kincaid, Yeah Burchell and YES for the Bylaw change. "




iHEARTmea wrote on Feb 24, 2008 8:54 AM:

" Go Janet! Go Peter Burchell! Time to return OUR co-op to its rightful owners. "




Kit Jones wrote on Feb 24, 2008 4:01 AM:

" What a class response to a most negative attack! This is the kind of person I want on my MEA co-op board. I will vote Kincaid, Burchell, and YES on the bylaw change. "