Local Politics…How Often Do We Get The Truth?
I am always amazed at how often the truth is distorted, or better yet, never even sees the light of day when it comes to various political issues. This blog will address two recent local issues, one I was involved in researching and another that I was made aware of last week. Both issues impact all Blaine County residents.
The first issue is that of the new Blaine County Public Safety Facility (PSF) which houses the county’s jail, the county’s patrol division, training rooms, administrative offices, and the communications center. I have been attempting to find out the “real” total of what the PSF cost Blaine County to build. Let me add that I have received welcome cooperation from the Blaine County Clerk and Recorder’s Office, but have yet to find anything that makes much sense. I first turned in a Freedom of Information Act Request to the Recorder’s Office for certain paperwork that I was receiving some resistance in getting. I was then told that I had to address a portion of the request directly to the Sheriff if I wanted the paperwork his department had. I was under the assumption the Sheriff would work with other county departments in making my request happen, I was wrong. I then made my request directly to the Sheriff. When I delivered my request to the Sheriff in person, I was again met with verbal resistance and knew I was attempting to find something out that I was not suppose to be looking into. I know the Sheriff is my opponent in the upcoming election, but can’t he be civil and sit down with me and show me the checks and balances I am looking for? He is the President of a jail consulting company, Rocky Mountain Corrections Inc., so I assume he would have the answers.
I received a certified letter three days after my request from the Sheriff’s Office, estimating the cost of the copied documents I was requesting to be around $125.00. Approximately one week later, I was contacted by the Sheriff’s Administrative Assistant and then again by the Under Sheriff, informing me I could pick up just over 200 pages in copied documents and that it would cost $172.00. It was no surprise to me that the total was quite a bit over what it was estimated to be, just like I suspect the final cost of the PSF is going to be. The Sheriff has time to take questions and phone calls on his Tuesday morning radio show, but I guess he doesn’t have time to set me straight on the final cost of the new PSF. Is it a coincidence the weekly radio Q&A began in election year, and does the Sheriff pay for that air time or is it a Public Service Announcement (PSA)? If it is a PSA, can the city’s Chiefs get some air time? Just wondering.
The Sheriff’s Office website states the final cost of the PSF at $11.3 million, a Wood River Journal article written on 07/23/08 had the Sheriff stating the cost at $11.9, and various other articles in the Express, Journal, SVO, and the Times-News put it at $12-$13 million, depending on who you ask. So no one thinks I’m making this stuff up, I copied and pasted the following from the Sheriff’s Office website: Construction was completed in an amazingly short 13 months with a total cost of $11.3 million dollars. That’s interesting, because I have learned from research I have done that the PSF is already over $11.3 and all the bills have yet to be paid. From financial documents I have received, it appears the PSF is already at approximately $14 million. It also states on financial documentation that $200,000 was spent out of the county’s drug forfeiture funds to help pay for covered parking or furniture. I can’t be sure which it was used for, but it is shown as being spent. I also do not know if this means we now have that much less to combat drug activity? The Sheriff has said all along that the PSF was “on budget”. If it was only $11.3 or $11.9, I guarantee we would hear how much it was under the projected $12.96 million. For the record, I would happy to find the PSF is at or under budget and find out Blaine County officials are handling taxpayer funds in a responsible manner, but I just can’t be sure at this point. All in all, maybe I’ll never find the “real” cost of the PSF and I’m guessing I definitely won’t find out until after the election.The second issue is that of a question that will be posed to the Blaine County voters on the upcoming ballot. It deals with Proposition Two. Blaine County Commissioners and Hailey City Council members have been having numerous discussions on the issue. What I find interesting is something I found out while attending the Hailey Town Hall meeting on the evening of Wednesday, October 15th. To keep a long story short, Hailey city officials were under the assumption that part of the Prop Two question would read, “Shall the Blaine County Board of County Commissioners be authorized to permanently increase the Blaine County budget from property tax revenues in the amount of $835,000 to fund operational expenses of a consolidated communications center to be managed by the Blaine County Board of Blaine County Commissioners?” When the wording of Prop Two was put on the finalized ballot, permanently was changed to annually. Interesting! The changing of that one word could dictate the outcome of Prop Two. Now, I do feel the City of Hailey’s pain, in that it was said at the town hall meeting that city officials have been trying to figure out who changed the wording, but have yet to get any straight answers.
So, I pose the question, “How often do we as citizens get the truth when it comes to political issues (local, state, or federal)?” My educated guess is that most of the time when someone investigates, we get the truth in small doses, just enough to make us believe everything is on the up and up. Or, you get the run around, and hopefully you’ll just give up and/or go away.
As Blaine County Sheriff, I WILL bring community trust and honesty back to the position. Unless a law enforcement official acts in an immoral, unethical, or illegal manner, I WILL NOT attempt to dismiss or take care of citations and/or arrests. That is what the judicial system is for, I WILL NOT be the judge and jury. When an issue arises that concerns an employee of the Sheriff’s Office, an outside agency WILL be immediately notified and asked to investigate the issue. There WILL be no more conflict of interest with me as Sheriff. I WILL be here for the citizens of Blaine County as I have no outside professional interests. I am very energetic and ready to bring back a high sense of morale and camaraderie within the Sheriff’s Office, and Blaine County law enforcement as a whole. This will benefit the residents of our county by having more highly trained, professional, and veteran law enforcement officials patrolling the streets of our county. There are many great men and women currently employed by the Sheriff’s Office and I look forward to working with them.
Steve England, Independent Candidate for Blaine County Sheriff
October 20th, 2008 at 7:48 am
Ah… yes.
I was told that when asked about the wording on the proposition to increase funding for dispatch, Commissioner Bowman shrugged his shoulders and didn’t utter anything. As though the wording were a mystery.
It isn’t such a huge stretch to think that he would have HAD to approve such wording himself…if in fact he didn’t create it to begin with. Caught in the act, so to speak. Even if he didn’t approve the wording, who does? The County Clerk? Mike M.? Not hardly….
Perhaps had the jail budget not cost the county an extra million or two, they would have the dough to fund dispatch.
You see, they want it both ways. They want to run government, they want to spend irresponsibly and then they want Hailey to pay for it when they do. They are spending Hailey’s money. Is Hailey a part of Blaine County? How many times have you heard that? When it is convenient. Now when they want money, it is not convenient to mention that Hailey is in Blaine County.
Hailey already pays for dispatch. Property tax. This situation of K/SV paying excess via disproportionate property values was socially engineered years ago when the north valley excluded any kind of subsidized housing for their slaves and stuck it all in the lap of the south valley. They didn’t want their property values to suffer and they didn’t. Obviously.
I am opposed to the prop because I am opposed to government with their lack of fiscal responsibility. They have no credibility in bringing any project to the voters, managing funds responsibly, avoiding litigation or even answering questions they don’t like. They have shown that the truth is simply a suggestion to them and they will disclose little half truths only as they see fit.
Like shrugging your shoulders when asked a direct question.
Brian
October 20th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Never.
October 21st, 2008 at 10:04 am
“How often do we as citizens get the truth when it comes to political issues (local, state, or federal)?”
There is no law that says any government agency is required to tell the truth. Lying and other forms of corruption are part of the job description.
Every year every candidate says whatever the voter wants to hear. Time and time again we are told that a candidate will “clean up” the office he/she will enter, but because of the entrenched bureaucracy it will never happen. Once elected, the candidate becomes part of it.
Which candidate will promise to fire everyone, throw out the rules and start fresh with an uncorrupted system? Dream on.
October 21st, 2008 at 10:42 am
Ahhhh…the silence here is deafening.
Why?
Perhaps nobody cares. Or fear. Now that’s a real possibility…
Maybe Steve is lying. Making this stuff up to suit his needs.
I have a dream. It goes like this. Rather than argue back and forth and evade questions and attack each other in a cleverly designed thing called a “debate” how about we ask all people seeking public office to submit to a polygraph test? Privately.
This thought struck me when I first heard from Clinton that he had smoked dope but not inhaled. Then I read Obama’s admitted drug use.
It struck me as absolutely hilarious that there are several police departments in the U.S. who absolutely refuse to hire anyone who admits to drug use or other crimes.
Therefore, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were qualified to run the country and be president of the United States, but they would not be qualified to be a street cop in Las Vegas.
Is that ridiculous or what? So if we are going to say that it’s ok to make cops submit to polygraph testing with their limited scope of responsibility why wouldn’t we require Presidents with their incredible scope of power and responsibility to submit to them as well?
Imagine voters actually deciding on a candidate based on truthful answers-instead of our time honored tradition of deciding on a candidate based on who is the more polished and successful liar or actor.
Wow. Choosing the most truthful and honest candidate. What a novel idea. And hey, if they said a candidate lied on several questions…you can still vote for him.
Very funny stuff. Folks would never go for it. What’s more, we would have virtually nobody running for office.
Except vegas cops.
Good luck my brother. See you Wed. nite for the “debate” and the pre-ordained quad annual endorsement by the Mt. Express. Submitting yourself for an hour or two of stress and torture. You have guts. I admire that and I admire you.
Brian
October 21st, 2008 at 12:41 pm
When will it ever end? Steve, I hope that you get elected so that you can get the documents you need to find out the truth. It seems that is the only way any of us will ever know what that jail cost us tax payers. I hope you don’t follow the above suggested trend that says once you are in the office, you become one of them and loose all sense of decency. I’m sure you won’t. I hope that the citizens of Blaine County realize the obvious media bull they get fed is just that. It seems there are is no truth in any of it that I can see. Shameless ploys by a shameless individual that is looking to line his own pockets with tax payers money! Time for a change people! Time for a change!
October 21st, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Arne, Brian, & Amanda-
I don’t blame any of you for wondering if I am one of these individuals that is attemting to get into a political office for my own personal gain and agenda. in this day and age that we live in it seems that is the only reason a majority of individuals run for elected positions.
All I can be honest about at this point is that I am hoping to become your next Blaine County Sheriff to bring back the most basic skills to the position; i.e. honesty, open communication, trust, community policing, being available for the citizens of our county, etc. These, among numerous other things, are why I want to become Sheriff. Make no mistake about it, I am not suggesting all the upper and mid-management sups and deputies all need to go, not at all. I believe there are many great people already employed by the BCSO, but until there is a change with the actual department head, there will continue to be a lack of motivation. I know a change at the top, with someone with an energetic and positive attitude will go along ways in making the BCSO one of the top LE agencies in our state. Not to mention having a Sheriff who is available, open to suggestion, and has an open door for ALL LE personnel in our county.
Maybe I’m just being unrealistic and naive with what I am envisioning and what I expect out of a Sheriff.
But, it sure sounds good!!!
Take Care and I’d appreciate your votes,
Steve England
October 21st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Two disclaimers:
First - I’m not interested in stepping into the election campaign for the office of Sheriff. Those arguments are for political types and candidates, and I am neither.
Second - A blog like this is a terrible place to communicate detailed or complicated information. Brian, you note that “the silence is deafening”, I will respond that I hadn’t read any of this until a few minutes ago, and although I think this is a lousy format to answer some of these questions I will do my best. I will also add that I take or return every phone call I receive, and schedule every meeting that is requested. It’s not typical for me to conduct official business through a blog site, but here goes (since numbers can be spun many ways, I will be as precise as I can wih what I am saying):
How much did the Public Safety Facility cost, and is it over or under budget?
This project has not been completely closed out, so the numbers are not yet final. However Char Nelson, Blaine County Operations Manager, has been pulling numbers together from all sources to provide a reconciliation for this project. Based on today’s information (with a few fairly minor items yet to be closed out) Blaine County has spent (or encumbered, which means promised to spend) a total of approximately $13.3 million on this project. On April 24, 2007 in Kreizenbeck Constructors Bid Summary the “Total Project Cost” as $12,982,279 (that’s all costs, both “hard” and “soft” i.e. design, and contingencies). At that point in time $480,000 in architectural fees had already been spent, and were therefore not included it what was identified as total cost in that Kreizenbeck’s 4-07 bid summary.
So of the $480,000 previously spent and the additional $12.98 million commited to in April of 2007, around $180,000 remains unspent and unencumbered. All of this information will be detailed and available for public consumption in written form very shortly (the summary spreadsheets already are), and county staff is available to answer questions.
What about that “changing ballot question?”
The question that appears as Proposition 2 on the countywide balllot for November 4 was never “changed”. It was written by county staff with input from Chairman Bowman, and using as part of the source material a suggested question that Hailey City Attorney Williamson sent us via email. Of concern to all was that the voter understand that the levy increase authorized by Proposition 2, the emergency dispatch levy, was permanent, meaning it would appear on your tax bill every year, as opposed to the Proposition 1 levy increase which would be temporary, and show up for only two years on the tax bill. Hence the words “permanent” and “annual”. I also understand that there was a proofing error that affected exactly where the work “annual” appeared in the sentence on the final ballot, but since it didn’t change the meaning it was neither noticed nor corrected.
Some have agrued that language implies the tax increase from Prop 2 would compound year after year - OK, fair enough to have that opinion. The fact is it would not compound, and what is most important is that the voter understand that, which is partly why I am posting this information.
I know that when Commissioner Bowman was asked about this, immediately dug into the source materials and agenda documents to get to the bottom of the question. He’s really not a shoulder-shrugging kind of guy…..
OK folks, all of that is the truth. And to answer Steve England’s original question, down here at the courthouse you get that every day.
Respectfully
Mike McNees
Blaine County Administrator
October 21st, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Mike-
Thank you for clarifying some of the PSF costs. I finally decided to start blogging in hopes that it would get some sort of feedback. I was not receiving the correct information by other means. I assumed I would not get a comment or call back from the Sheriff himself, so thank you again for your comment and clarification.
I will call you on Thursday to set up a meet and talk with you further about the PSF, since it appears that you have correct figures (still have some questions about the forfeiture funds and other bill exchanges). It does appear from your own comment that the PSF will come in around $13.3-13.5 when it is all said and done. $440,000-$640,000 over the original $12.96 million alloted for the project (10.46 in voter approved bonds, 2.5 in approved county contingency funding). I can somewhat live with that with a project this large.
What I would hope for is that we the public quit being told the project was “on budget” and that the Sheriff’s Office website list the correct/estimated up to date figure.
As for Tom Bowman, he’s always treated me with respect. Did he shrug his shoulders and evade the question at the Town Hall Meeting? Yes he did, I was there. All I ask for is that an elected official let us know that they will at least research the issue and get back with us (at the minimum).
As for your last sentence, “And to answer Steve England’s original question, down here at the courthouse you get that every day.” Mike, my blog was not directed at every elected official. It was an attempt to get to the bottom of something, that quite frankly, I was getting the runaround in finding (for lack of a better term). As most people know, it is election time, and I was receiving some resistance from my counterpart with the info.
I am the underdog in this race, and I am well aware it is an uphill battle when going up against a longtime incumbent. There is no poll to know how I’m doing, so I may lose 9-1, I don’t know. What I do know is Blaine County citizens do not always receive the truth when it comes to my opponent, so therefore, I WILL keep my checks and balances from here on out as to the truth (when it pertains to my opponent). For instance, is Bellevue receiving 24-7 coverage, or even the entire county receiving 24-7 coverage? NO, that is the TRUTH. I am no Saint, never claimed to be, but deception with the position of Sheriff has gone on for far too long in our county. Long before you or I graced this community, the PSF has been my opponent’s pet project, and for him to not come out with up to date figures is wrong to the taxpayers of our county.
Again thank you for clarifying what you have, and I’ll speak with you soon.
Steve England
October 21st, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Mike;
Thank you for responding here. I am glad you did and I know what murky waters you wade in. I think.
I too, take no exception to the size of the overruns. A half million or so on a project this large seems tolerable.
It only leaves me with one question. What happened to the 1.14 million earmarked covered parking/storage building? The budget details shows that it was removed, yet it clearly exists.
On the issue of the budget question, it seems possible that it was not calculated. Opening dialogue with the city prior to the final version seems appropriate. If unfortunately, hindsight.
I don’t think there is anything wrong with telling the truth. I accept what you have written here, precisely because it is written, as truthful. The beauty of blogging is that you own what you write. No blaming reporters for misquotes.
You have always been civil and I appreciate your comments. Thanks.
Brian
October 22nd, 2008 at 9:06 am
Gents - Just to clarify, what you are calling “overrun” I identified in my explanation as money that had already been spent (mostly architectural fees) before the final “project budget”, $10.46M in voter approved bonds, $2.5M in county funding as identified by Steve, had been set. Other folks can argue the semantics, but the records I’m looking at are pretty clear that was the situation.
October 22nd, 2008 at 9:39 am
I understand. We call it an overrun because it was supposed to be 10.46+2.5. Or a total of 12.96. That’s what the bond question called for.
In looking at the architectural fees-they were not paid in full on the front end and continue to filter in.
That was the voter approved amount and the amount the voters were led to believe would get the job done.
Brian
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:24 am
I believe that Walt Femlings course has run. He may have been a great sheriff at one point in his career, but that time has come and gone. I believe he has become too comfortable with his position and is no longer looking into what best suits the needs of our community, but in fact what best suits him.
Steve, I have witnessed first hand how hard you work, the dedication and devotion you put into everything you do. I’ve witnessed some of these things even prior to you running for sheriff. I’ve walked beside you throughout the night supporting the Relay for Life for cancer, bowled on the next lane, played softball with you and watched you cheer on your team and fellow players. I know that you put in extra hours for Drivers Safety Class, after putting in your hours at the office, but hoping to instill some values into others. Thank you for all you do to support this community. Good Luck on the 4th!
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:28 am
I believe that Walt Femlings course has run. He may have been a great sheriff at one point in his career, but that time has come and gone. I believe he has become too comfortable with his position and is no longer looking into what best suits the needs of our community, but in fact what best suits him.
Steve, I have witnessed first hand how hard you work, the dedication and devotion you put into everything you do. I’ve witnessed some of these things even prior to you running for sheriff. I’ve walked beside you throughout the night supporting the Relay for Life for cancer, bowled on the opposing lane, played softball with you and watched you cheer on your team and fellow players with enthusiasm. I know that you put in extra hours for Drivers Safety Class, after putting in your hours at the office, hoping to instill some values into others. Thank you for all you do to support this community. Good luck on the 4th!
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Lacie-
Thank you for your kind words and continued support.
Steve England
October 28th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
I hope SVO and The Express are listening. The local press needs to be aggressively investigating all of this, so we can find out what is true and what isn’t. Good investigative reporting, though time-consuming and hard on news budgets, is the basis for informed public dialogue and a strong community.
Honest politicians always encourage a strong, aggressive press because it benefits them.
I challenge our local media to start digging! It’s long overdue on this story and several others.