Voters who cast their ballot for Ron Weifenbach did so because they believed that Ron would make a better mayor than the incumbent.
I know and like Mr. Weifenbach and respect his decision to run. His voice in the campaign was valuable to me, and should have been to all Rapid City voters, and for that matter to all the other candidates. Mr. Weifenbach had a great deal to say about management style. And, I hope that the remaining candidates were listening.
Mr. Weifenbach ran an honorable campaign and articulated many reasons why things should change in City Hall. And, he suggested how he would change them.
What you have in Sam Kooiker, is a candidate who is willing to listen. I have no doubt in my mind that those who voted for Mr. Weifenbach would be more than happy with the manner in which Mr. Kooiker chooses to manage city hall. And, I know both gentlemen well enough to know that Mr. Kooiker will place great value on Mr. Weifenbach's ideas and advice.
If, as a Weifenbach supporter, you seek change at city hall, it is essential that you get out and vote for Mr. Kooiker.
7 comments:
From indianz.com comes this indictment of Rapid City from Melvin Martin:
"June 9, 2011, marks the 39th anniversary of the 1972 Rapid City Flood, the worst event in the history of that town, my birthplace, and as I have stated here before, the most racist city in the U.S. for Indians. On the Internet there is next to nothing about how the flood impacted Rapid City's Indian population and nothing at all on the sole “official site” for the flood, that of the Rapid City Public Library.
In what is now a portion of the so-called “flood plain” by the creek, there was a vast ghetto of the poorest of Rapid City's poor, mainly Indian people who lived in ramshackle dwellings of every description, from dilapidated old Victorian-types of houses that had been transported there from who-knows-where, to shacks and huts made from all manner of cast-off materials. There were no sidewalks to speak of and the street lights were at a minimum."
Stupid town.
Larry,
You're always welcome here on the Forum, but what has this to do with the original post?
The whole landfill ruse is a distraction from the 800 pound red/white gorilla in the election. You'd think i could just walk away from Rapid City and wait for the Yellowstone supervolcano to fix it; just hasn't happened yet.
That's okay, Mike, go back to feathering your own nest, i'll get over it.
huh?
Mr. Weifenbach has spoken on this and the fact that he declined to endorse a candidate obviously cuts both ways. He is in a better position than the pundits to decide if, in fact, his philosophy would be better represented by Mr. Kooiker.
Wayne,
Or perhaps Mr. Weifenbach has to do business with the same Rapid City wealthy who are supporting Mr. Hanks and he does not wish to damage his livelihood.
I think Mr. Weifenbach is probably wise to not endorse. He may wish to run again in two years and the endorsement of either candidate will diminish his campaign then.
I also think Mr. Kooiker's message will resonate with Weifenbach voters more than Mr. Hanks'. We shall see.
I have not observed municipal politics as long as you have--perhaps your attribution of self-serving economic motives to Mr. Weifenbach is correct. We shall see.
Post a Comment