http://www.co.yavapai.az.us/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=58006

September 15, 2010 at 8:47 pm

Mr. Dible, REALLY, should the professionals that we pay to do their jobs just be silent? Should they not speak out and tell the truth? Yes, of course, we, the taxpayers of this district, have the right to question the fire department’s expenditures. And they keep answering. But, what can Ms. Daines answers be that you would accept? What do you not understand about the facts, about the independent financial audits, about the expenses, about the needs of the community? You say she is “demonizing” citizens. Ha! You are “demonizing” OUR fire department.

The “Slate of Hate” you support do know the facts. They have spoken to Karen Daines. They have spoken to Chief Hazime. But they do not believe anything they are shown or told. You want to know why? BECAUSE THEY DON’T WANT THE TRUTH. It doesn’t fit in their Agenda.”

Now let’s get to the part that ties in with the above comment by Alice Hickey. First item, brought up by “independent” SFD Board candidate Bert Berkshire who questioned the full page ad placed in the RRN by Chief Hazime. The Chief clearly explained that there was a need for District staff to clarify the facts in the half page ad run in the RRN by the Demme, Blauert, Erick slate that provided some erroneous information dealing with salaries. Since the RRN refused to run his article under the Guest Perspective column, the Chief found himself with no other choice but place the SFD ad in the RRN. It was obvious to all that Mr. Berkshire placed this item on the agenda to please the Demme, Blauert, Erick slate. As pointed out very eloquently by one of the speakers, Gene Chandler, perhaps his true motive was to show his solidarity with that group, so that he could be appointed by them to replace Don Harr’s vacancy in case they got elected. The other speaker, Joan Shannon, made an excellent point by saying that she and her neighbors were happy to see the ad because it clarified the information they saw in the original half page RRN ad. Her presentation reflected the feelings of the majority of the readers who need to know the true facts about the various issues being brought by a slate of candidates whose sole purpose is to plant seeds of doubt and mistrust about the SFD and it’s staff.

This brings me to the second item on the agenda with political implications. Charles Christensen placed an item on the agenda that alleged that by merely providing the facts about certain misinformation disseminated by some of the candidates, “certain SFD employees possibly violated the Hatch Act” http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/a/hatch_act.htm .. Passed in 1939, the Hatch Act restricts the political activity of executive branch employees of the federal government, District of Columbia government, and some state and local employees who work in connection with federally funded programs. Of course, we all know that these complaints, most probably placed by Mr. Craig Dible, are meant to divert the attention away from his weak candidates and focus instead on the SFD. When these complaints are finally investigated weeks from now, it will be well after the election.

The contention is that when certain SFD employees, when clarifying articles or blogs in some of the local electronic media (such as the one quoted above), were actually violating the law. As stated so well by Alice Hickey “should the professionals that we pay to do their jobs just be silent? Should they not speak out and tell the truth?”

Is the Demme, Blauert, Erick slate so desperate that they want the electorate to hear and see only what they decide is helpful to their cause? Is this what they expect to do if they were ever to get elected? Are these actions of individuals with integrity? Are these the sort of individuals who should get your vote and trust to represent you as SFD Governing Board members?

In a posting I made under this topic on October 22, 2010 , I commented, speaking of Mr. Craig Dible “Your strategy is to deflect the electorate’s attention away from his slate and focus instead on misinformation. One just wonders what else you have up your sleeve between now and November 2nd, I am sure that it is going to be more of the negative campaign you have formulated for your slate in an attempt to win this election.

My comments above are a clear indication that Mr. Craig and his slate have, unfortunately, proven that my earlier posting was not off target.

AHHHHHHH ! I know why, so they can over charge Sedonans.

Keep up the good work Mr. Johnson and other Sedonans!!!!!!!!!

Who do they think they are!

They have been over-Charging us for years!

You work for us…..Remember that Sedona Fire Dept.

In fact, he is very actively involved and, yet he does it behind the scenes like he did in the 2008 election of Don Harr and Charles Christensen.. To use his own expression in his posting, he is indeed a prime example of a “basement dweller”.

Having designed many advertising campaigns, he has chosen the path to make unfounded allegations meant to put the opposition in a defensive mode. These allegations against the SFD and it’s operations are meant with a great deal of resistance from him when staff takes the time to clarify and explain the true facts. He expects no response what-so-ever from any of the staff members to the misinformation that’s being provided in articles written to disseminate his slate’s propaganda. He just expects staff to sit by and shake their heads affirmatively to whatever he and his slate offer as facts.

I am sorry Mr. Dible, but as a taxpayer of this District, I EXPECT staff to clarify and explain their side of the story. That’s why I and the majority of the taxpayers in this District are paying for their salary. Whatever they say or write may not be necessarily to your liking, but those individuals who are entrusted with fiduciary responsibility within the SFD, have the DUTY, RESPONSIBILITY and OBLIGATION to set the record straight. We, the taxpayers have the right. to know THE facts not YOUR slate’s facts and have the right to hear it directly from the source instead of three totally unprepared and uninformed candidates. In fact someone made a comment after one of candidate forums “Can they all even read and write?” Your strategy is to deflect the electorate’s attention away from his slate and focus instead on misinformation. One just wonders what else you have upyour sleeve between now and November 2nd, I am sure that it is going to be more of the negative campaign you have formulated for your slate in an attempt to win this election. It worked in 2008 and it will definitely not work this time. This time the silent majority will make their feelings known at the polls!

Yet another display of character that lacks Integrity in my eyes. It almost sounds like Charles Christensen who asked for firefighter votes and in turn would hand out raises across the board. Obviously these guys knew better and that’s why they did not support him in 2008 and I would venture to guess that’s why they are not supporting David Baluert in 2010!