Ok, last election-eve post here, but one that I couldn’t let slide.
There’s a concept in aviation called the “go/no-go” decision. Pilots train to recognize and act immediately upon one or more criteria to decide, for example, whether a takeoff can be continued given airspeed achieved and runway remaining. Not something you want to spend a lot of time analyzing.
Similar concepts exist in other fields. Another example might be in manufacturing quality assurance. If your widget is supposed to have a 1″ hole in it and no smaller, an exact 1″ go/no-go gauge will either go into the hole or it won’t.
Sometimes I get down in the weeds so far that I can’t see the forest for the trees (how’s that for a mixed metaphor?). I have read and archived candidate websites; collected and kept the campaign mailers from several year’s worth of Scottsdale City Council election campaigns; and the other campaigns for county, state, school board, and other offices that are applicable to my address.
I failed to notice an ironic juxtaposition recently, but thanks to a sharp-eyed ScottsdaleTrails reader I can observe it and share with you.
Jennifer Petersen’s campaign mailers claim that she is
Moving Scottsdale from a city of “NO” to a city of “GO”
However, Linda Milhaven’s campaign musings include:
Working together, we have accomplished a lot for our city…
Today, new private investment Downtown and along McDowell Road totals over half a billion dollars. I am proud that my vote helped to make these projects possible…
New private investment downtown and along McDowell Road totals more than $500 million.
So which is it? Is Jennifer Petersen’s Scottsdale a city of “NO?” Not according to Linda Milhaven.
The truth is a lot closer to Milhaven’s version. Actually, it’s quite a bit beyond that version. Milhaven has said “no” to almost nothing in her four years on council, especially matters of spending your tax dollars to subsidize her friends at the Scottsdale Cultural Council; for polo matches and rugby scrums; for professional golfers and golf tournaments.
Milhaven (along with cronies Dennis Robbins, Suzanne Klapp, Virginia Korte, and Mayor Jim Lane) have said “go” to their developer buddies for over 10,000 new apartments which will drag down any resurgence of property values; load up on cost of public services like police and fire resources; and will provide comparatively minuscule property tax revenue for the city.
I submit to you that we shouldn’t elect officials for their talent at saying “yes” to every hair-brained taxpayer-funded subsidy or dumbed-down development standards. We should save our votes for those who say “yes” to real fiscal responsibility, unlike Milhaven’s patently false claim about having a balanced budget, reduced spending, and adequate maintenance spending.
Linda Milhaven, Dennis Robbins, and Jennifer Petersen are “NO-GO.”