Monday, June 11, 2007
Jack Wilson for Supervisor???
No. Vote for her opponent Dorothy Jaeckle.
In an earlier blog, I advocated voting for Jack Wilson for supervisor. This was because he communicated with his constituents (in this case, me) better than his opponent Dorothy Jaeckle. However, I got a campaign blurb from Ms. Jaeckle that puts serious question on Jack Wilson. Ms. Jaeckle, in that letter, says:
My opponent, Jack Wilson, is a development rights lawyer whose occupation by day is to represent private developers in obtaining rezoning, at times, in spite of significant citizen opposition. Although Jack is an ethical person, I believe his occupation creates too much potential for conflict of interest and compromises the level of trust by citizens in their elected officials. Jack Wilson currently serves on the planning commission as an appointee of Dickie King. Dickie King spent well over $100,000 in the last Supervisor's race, the majority of it contributed by a PAC called Growing Chesterfield. Builders, developers, and politicians are the main contributors to this PAC. These same contributors are funding Jack Wilson's campaign.
This tells me that he supports the developers. He serves as counsel for them and he gets plenty of monetary support from them. To me this sounds like a candidate that the developers bought out. The developers are a menace in Chesterfield County. They are rapidly consuming all the land, including all the trees and wildlife and nice places to be, in the county. They are establishing in its place subdivisions of huge McMansions from which it takes huge mileages of car-clogged roads to get to anywhere, surrounded by acres of Box-Marts with huge parking lots. Residents have complained a lot about these developers, and a new word has been coined from them: to chesterfield (as a verb). This is what Ms. Jaeckle says about the developers:
Development is necessary to sustain economic growth, but it must be accompanied by the necessary infrastructure. How many hours have been spent by Enon residents waiting to get through the light at Route 10 and Old Stage Road? How can the county fast track the 4,500- home Branner Station development without any substantial plans for an East/W est road to take traffic off Bradley Bridge, Happy Hill, and Harrowgate Roads? Although our 2004 School Bond Referendum was to fund a replacement for the Clover Hill High School, we might best be served by looking at the now overcrowded situation at Thomas Dale. I will work closely with our School Board representative to seek relief for Thomas Dale. Development should not be approved at the price of compromising citizen safety or quality of life. How can a candidate represent citizen's interest when their campaign is substantially funded by developers?
I and those supporting me are not anti-development. I think Chesterfield is a wonderful place to live and recognize that others want to live here. However, current residents should not have their quality of life diminished due to overburdened roads and overcrowded schools.
Dorothy Jaeckle should not say she is not anti-development. She is clearly anti-development. We need anti-development supervisors in Chesterfield County. She is also wrong when she says that growth is needed. No growth can continue forever. Eventually resource limits are reached. (But this is not anything her opponent can fix.) If she is elected, then we can expect some action taken against these developers who would force the county to build more roads and schools.
Further, she says this about Jack Wilson:
Our founders never meant for our representatives to be chosen by current politicians and wealthy developers. Campaigns should not be about garnering wealthy donors, erecting expensive 4x8 signs on developer property and sending out a barrage of glossy brochures. It should be about going out to the citizens and listening to how to best represent them. For this primary, I sought no political endorsements or large campaign contributions from PACs or large developers. I seek only the endorsement of the taxpayers of this district.
Indeed, he is one of the biggest sign polluters I have ever seen in this county. He says he will take the signs down after election day, but until then they mar the landscape.
So I withdraw my recommendation to vote for Jack Wilson. Does this mean I favor Dorothy Jaeckle? Perhaps not. She says she is a conservative. That is a point against her. I don't want anyone supporting anything the Bush administration does, nor anything the current Republican candidates (except Ron Paul) support. But a vote for her may very well dispose of a developiot in the county and strike a blow for a more sustainable lifestyle.
But the real action may be this November. I found out recently from asking the Democrats that Ree Hart is running as the Democrat for Bermuda supervisor. She will oppose the winner of this Republican primary. There has been absolutely no information about her candidacy or about her selection anywhere in any newspaper in this area, in any web site relating to Chesterfield County, or in any campaign literature or documents from the County that I could find. I don't know why they don't want to inform the voter. I don't know where she stands on developments. But we do know where Jack Wilson stands. She has a problem getting in touch with the constitutents, but that is minor compared to the problems that her opponent has. I say now vote for Dorothy Jaeckle on June 12. Whether she should get my vote in November depends on what Ree Hart offers.
In an earlier blog, I advocated voting for Jack Wilson for supervisor. This was because he communicated with his constituents (in this case, me) better than his opponent Dorothy Jaeckle. However, I got a campaign blurb from Ms. Jaeckle that puts serious question on Jack Wilson. Ms. Jaeckle, in that letter, says:
My opponent, Jack Wilson, is a development rights lawyer whose occupation by day is to represent private developers in obtaining rezoning, at times, in spite of significant citizen opposition. Although Jack is an ethical person, I believe his occupation creates too much potential for conflict of interest and compromises the level of trust by citizens in their elected officials. Jack Wilson currently serves on the planning commission as an appointee of Dickie King. Dickie King spent well over $100,000 in the last Supervisor's race, the majority of it contributed by a PAC called Growing Chesterfield. Builders, developers, and politicians are the main contributors to this PAC. These same contributors are funding Jack Wilson's campaign.
This tells me that he supports the developers. He serves as counsel for them and he gets plenty of monetary support from them. To me this sounds like a candidate that the developers bought out. The developers are a menace in Chesterfield County. They are rapidly consuming all the land, including all the trees and wildlife and nice places to be, in the county. They are establishing in its place subdivisions of huge McMansions from which it takes huge mileages of car-clogged roads to get to anywhere, surrounded by acres of Box-Marts with huge parking lots. Residents have complained a lot about these developers, and a new word has been coined from them: to chesterfield (as a verb). This is what Ms. Jaeckle says about the developers:
Development is necessary to sustain economic growth, but it must be accompanied by the necessary infrastructure. How many hours have been spent by Enon residents waiting to get through the light at Route 10 and Old Stage Road? How can the county fast track the 4,500- home Branner Station development without any substantial plans for an East/W est road to take traffic off Bradley Bridge, Happy Hill, and Harrowgate Roads? Although our 2004 School Bond Referendum was to fund a replacement for the Clover Hill High School, we might best be served by looking at the now overcrowded situation at Thomas Dale. I will work closely with our School Board representative to seek relief for Thomas Dale. Development should not be approved at the price of compromising citizen safety or quality of life. How can a candidate represent citizen's interest when their campaign is substantially funded by developers?
I and those supporting me are not anti-development. I think Chesterfield is a wonderful place to live and recognize that others want to live here. However, current residents should not have their quality of life diminished due to overburdened roads and overcrowded schools.
Dorothy Jaeckle should not say she is not anti-development. She is clearly anti-development. We need anti-development supervisors in Chesterfield County. She is also wrong when she says that growth is needed. No growth can continue forever. Eventually resource limits are reached. (But this is not anything her opponent can fix.) If she is elected, then we can expect some action taken against these developers who would force the county to build more roads and schools.
Further, she says this about Jack Wilson:
Our founders never meant for our representatives to be chosen by current politicians and wealthy developers. Campaigns should not be about garnering wealthy donors, erecting expensive 4x8 signs on developer property and sending out a barrage of glossy brochures. It should be about going out to the citizens and listening to how to best represent them. For this primary, I sought no political endorsements or large campaign contributions from PACs or large developers. I seek only the endorsement of the taxpayers of this district.
Indeed, he is one of the biggest sign polluters I have ever seen in this county. He says he will take the signs down after election day, but until then they mar the landscape.
So I withdraw my recommendation to vote for Jack Wilson. Does this mean I favor Dorothy Jaeckle? Perhaps not. She says she is a conservative. That is a point against her. I don't want anyone supporting anything the Bush administration does, nor anything the current Republican candidates (except Ron Paul) support. But a vote for her may very well dispose of a developiot in the county and strike a blow for a more sustainable lifestyle.
But the real action may be this November. I found out recently from asking the Democrats that Ree Hart is running as the Democrat for Bermuda supervisor. She will oppose the winner of this Republican primary. There has been absolutely no information about her candidacy or about her selection anywhere in any newspaper in this area, in any web site relating to Chesterfield County, or in any campaign literature or documents from the County that I could find. I don't know why they don't want to inform the voter. I don't know where she stands on developments. But we do know where Jack Wilson stands. She has a problem getting in touch with the constitutents, but that is minor compared to the problems that her opponent has. I say now vote for Dorothy Jaeckle on June 12. Whether she should get my vote in November depends on what Ree Hart offers.
Comments:
<< Home
Dear Jim, Thanks so much for an excellent and amusing blog entry. We are Ree Hart's daughters and we'd like to refer you to www.reehart.com Our mother ran in 2003 against "Dickie" King and incumbent Jack McHale finishing a respectable second. We have been laying the groundwork, but letting the Republicans choose their candidate before waging our full campaign. We look forward to talking with you and encourage you to vote for Ree Hart in November!
Thanks for the comments. The election results are in, and Dorothy Jaeckle has won by a considerable margin. Sic semper developer. The campaign this November looks really interesting indeed - two really good candidates both of whom seem to be against the developers. I hope your mother checks out the peak oil and sustainability web sites to get some ideas as to what a well-planned community should be like.
Post a Comment
<< Home
