I think maybe the South Lake Tea Party siphoned off some of my candidate recommendations. They just had an online survey of their members HERE and seemed to agree with me on just about all Lake County election candidates.
I don't know how they did that, because I don't go to their meetings, but we agree about 100% on their survey results. Maybe we are both drinking Niagara water?
Go look at the results.
Watch this blog for some of the reasons why I made my choices later this week.
I do NOT agree with many candidate recommendations from the liberal Orlando Sentinel, but you can also see videos of their interviews of candidates, including the local ones for County Commission HERE (scroll down and look at the right column for the videos). Those are very instructive. But, I have had a problem viewing them because Adobe Flash CRASHES in the middle, then the stupid video player software they use won't let you fast forward back to where the crash occurred, so you have to sit through the entire first part of the interview again to get back to where you were in the video. But, unlike most candidate forums, they asked some pointed questions, and when they got platitudes and fluff answers, they asked for proof or examples to support a platitude statement. In interview techniques, that is called boring down to the deeper levels of knowledge to determine if you just got a platitude, or the person actually has specifics to support their stand on an issue.
At least one District 2 candidate had the "deer in headlights" look when asked for "proof".
I also recommend going to the same Orlando Sentinel "Guide to Candidates" page in the left column and review the sections for the local Lake County Candidates, and "selecting 2" to compare - you will be taken to a page where you see the candidate responses to a questionnaire sent to them by the Orlando Sentinel, which is different than the video questions, and gives more background on candidate stands on issues. Look for fluff & platitude answers where there is no specific examples of how their "solution" would improve a situation. They you know you are seeing BS.
For instance, County Commissioner District 2 Candidate Mark Saunders keeps saying that the County budget is $400-million and he would cut it by 5% to save $20-million. The problem is that most of it is NOT under County Commissioner controls. They only control about $65-million of the total budget, plus approved capital expenditures like the Judicial Center (about $50-million). The Commissioners have no authority to cut funds from the other Constitutional Officers - the Chairman can ask, but if the Sherrif refuses to cut any of his $60+ million budget, they have no power to make him. Additionally, the total budget includes dedicated tax line items on the property tax bills for libraries, fire fighting, etc. which I don't think they can adjust either. And Saunders has been told that, but he keeps using incorrect numbers.
Or, here is a "platform" statement from Linda Stewart about her accomplishments as an incumbent for District 4 (Lake County Commissioner):
"2. initiated and put in place a plan to diversify the economy by attracting a variety of industries, help our local businesses, encourage our entrepreneurs, and grow jobs"
There are NO specific, measurable accomplishments. She cannot cite one clear example of an industry that was attracted to Lake County in her four years of incumbency (except Niagara Water, which she sued). She touts "a plan" that is widely ridiculed as being a $100,000 boondoggle for consultants. For instance, they recommended that Lake County increase tourism - DUH! She can't point to any reasonable number of jobs created by the economic development plan either. She approved a $300,000 annual contract with the Metro Orlando Economic Development Commission which had NO specific deliverables or performance requirements to earn that $300k (I read the contract). Thus most of her statements are platitudes.
vj
