ARCHIVES
 

December 2003
Main Page

Return to
Main Archive Page

Editor Letters

Sheriff's Report

 

INSIDE

Write-ins flame out in parks election

by Meg Olson

In a curious turn of events, the only race for a parks board position that had two candidates on the ballot was also the only one that had a single active candidate. Linda Hughes won with 161 votes while Doug Ritchey, who dropped out of the race too late to get his name off the ballot, received 76.

Irene Waters and Bev Griffiths were unopposed on the ballot for their positions but faced a vigorous campaign from write-in candidates Pam Oakley and B.J. Kish. Both incumbents got strong voter support, Waters beating Oakley 204 to 91 and Griffiths beating Kish 202 to 52.

The parks department operating levy also got strong voter support, with almost 70 percent of those casting ballots approving the $35,000 levy, which will cost property owners 14.5 cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation. In addition to keeping the community center, ball field, summer and seniors programs running, this levy includes funds to add another day of senior center activities, in collaboration with county parks and the council on aging.

Waters said the program would start as soon as a contract could be drafted between the three agencies. “I don’t think it would be a problem for it to start in January,” she said, despite the new tax dollars not becoming available until April. She added the success of the extra day would be evaluated at the end of 2004. “It’s up to the seniors to get their people on board and make this happen,” she said, citing a financial concern with people coming for lunch and not paying to join the senior center, or even omitting to make a donation for lunch.

The parks department started looking at how to spend their money in 2004 at a meeting described as a “working session.” The November 20 budget meeting at Waters home was scheduled at the November 5 regular meeting of the board, but was not further announced to the public, which under the state open meetings act means the board can take no action at the meeting. The act defines “action” as discussion, deliberation, review, or final vote.

BACK TO TOP

 

©2000-2004 All Point Bulletin All Right Reserved

Privacy Statement

Questions or comments about this web site, contact the Webmaster

Web Design & Hosting by
Web Design and Hosting

 

Home Page