Candidate Forum as Job Interview: Who Gets the Job?

The videos for last night's candidates forum here in Madison are up and ready for your viewing and sharing! The Madville Times channel on YouTube has 39 videos from last night, featuring opening remarks from all 15 candidates for the five offices on the local ballot, along with all 17 questions asked during the forum. 17 questions: we covered a lot of ground!

As you watch these candidate videos, think of the forum as a job interview. All 15 of these citizens want a job. You and I and every other voter in Lake County are on the hiring committee. Who did the best job in these interviews?

I welcome you all, friends and neighbors, to review the candidates' statements and performances last night and at last week's AAUW forum here in Madison. Compare notes in the comment section below.

Here's how I evaluate these job interviews:
----------------------------
District 8 State Senate: Senator Russell Olson has the advantages of incumbency. Having served two terms in Pierre, he has more bill details handy for discussion. However, while the bduget is a difficult beast, Schmidtke seems more committed to protecting priorities like education and health care from budget cuts and cites a more detailed list of places to seek efficiencies, largely state perks and jobs. Schmidtke is not as informed on the ag productivity tax; however, Olson demonstrates a pigheaded commitment to an obsolete and unfair taxation model based on market value of land rather than the actual income and ability to pay of the owner.



Olson is the better salesman (political donations from car dealer Prostrollo tend to rub off on people). Schmidtke represents the better positions for District 8.

----------------------------
District 8 State House: Representative Gerald Lange manifests the clearest sense of greter purpose to serve South Dakota. He is motivated by his conscience and his church to lead South Dakota in a greater conversation about justice and equality. He sees our tax system imposing inequalities not only in wealth but in power. He sees rich elites controlling the state, hoarding their wealth, and shifting the burdens of paying for public functions onto the poor. He understands the long history of Republican domination and hypocrisy in the state.



Yet even as he lays out these grand perils to democracy, he always couches the discussion in terms of specific South Dakota policies: our immoral tax on food, our unethical reliance on video lottery (because, Lange sees, we'd rather get our money from losers than from winners), our failure to live up to our constitutional mandate to provide adequate and equal education for all students. Lange even offers the clear and obvious solution to the state budget deficit that no one else has the guts to mention: making Wal-Mart and other corporations pay their fair share with a corporate income tax, just like the income tax we currently limit to banks and insurers. Lange can be the practical and moral conscience of the Legislature. We need a voice like that to remind us of our highest ideals and say the things others lack the courage to say.

Representative Mitch Fargen stumbled a bit in his introduction, losing track of a recitation of his own key legislation from last session. However, he recovered with further discussion of specific legislative proposals and positions during the questions. He also offered a strong indictment of the idea that we have to cut education to balance the budget when we could instead just stop giving handouts to oil corporations.

Patricia Stricherz (who is a paying sponsor of this blog, but whose $25 has not bought these remarks) has shown clear improvement as a candidate since her first run for State House in 2008. Her prepared opening remarks shared a strong anecdote about her ability to fight against long odds to build and sustain a charitable organization, followed by a well-composed campaign pitch about her sympathy for the concerns of working people. She has studied the state budget and improved her command of practical facts and figures related to the job of State Representative. Her experience campaigning has increased her perspective on South Dakota issues. Were either Lange or Fargen not available for this job, Stricherz might be a reasonable second choice.

Jason Bjorklund still appears to have come to the wrong job interview. Bjorklund advocates repealing the national health insurance reform law. South Dakota cannot do that. He blames the recession on "legislation, regulation, and taxation." South Dakota legislation, regulation, and taxation did not cause the recession. He advocates expanding conceal-carry gun rights in other states. South Dakota has no say over other states' gun regulations. He advocates expanding free-market competition and choice in education. South Dakota lacks the wealth and population density in all but a handful of communities to make broad private education or charter schools in competition with existing public schools viable. Bjorklund is interviewing for a guest-host position on conservative talk radio, or maybe for U.S. Senate, most certainly not for South Dakota State Legislature.

----------------------------
Lake County Auditor: Roberta Janke has an obvious advantage over Shelli Gust. She brings 23 years of experience to the position, having worked in the office under retiring auditor Kay Schmidt. Both candidates share a commitment to public service and increased transparency. Both have demonstrated professionalism and ability to work with other departments. Janke simply has the longer, stronger resume.



Janke is essentially a status quo candidate; no one has demonstrated a need to change the status quo. With no ill reflection on Gust, I can say that Janke is the sensible business choice for stability in the auditor's office.

----------------------------
Lake County Sheriff: All three candidates are experienced law enforcement officers. Younger candidates Dan Wyatt and Jason Lurz have an advantage in expressing themselves with energy and enthusiasm. However, last night, current Sheriff Roger Hartman demonstrated he too can connect with citizens. In a question about dealing with crisis situations, Hartman told the most compelling story. He spoke of responding to a fatal car wreck, three children killed on a Sunday morning on the way home from church. With a somber simplicity that would do John Wayne proud, Hartman said that in an emergency like that, you do what you have to do. Then you go home, hug your own children, and then find a private place where you can shed a few tears of your own.



We have three good men running for sheriff.

Hartman can point to various administrative accomplishments in terms of hiring a fourth deputy and bringing in grant money for safety equipment. Lurz and Wyatt feel the sheriff's department needs to pay more attention to budgeting and public outreach. Both Wyatt and Lurz exhibit more inclination for proactive management and law enforcement. And it would appear, given concerns expressed at both fora about the need for better rural response and budgeting, improved management would be good for the Lake County Sheriff's Department.

-------------------------------
Lake County Commission: Incumbency has its advantages. As I cited in my evaluation of the Lake County Commission candidates at last week's forum, Commissioner Scott Pedersen has the smarts and people skills to explain very clearly the actions of the commission and the needs of the county. Craig Johannsen is not quite as well-spoken as Pedersen, but his ten years of experience on the commission and with numerous other public bodies in the county inform his answers quite well.

In their first runs for public office, candidates Kelli Wollmann and Doug Erickson have both indicated a general desire to serve the community. That willingness to serve is admirable. However, campaigns are a competition. Everyone who files a petition demonstrates a willingess to serve; candidates must then distinguish themselves as communicators and policy experts. The proposed zoning ordinance revisions are a perfect test of candidate abilities. The zoning ordinance changes are clearly on the radar of Lake County voters, as indicated by the questions from the audience at last night's forum. Drafts of the zoning revisions have been floating around town since March. Pedersen has seen these revisions as commissioner; Johannsen has seen these changes as a member of the water quality committee. That work gives Pedersen and Johannsen have an advantage, but it is reasonable to expect other candidates to do the homework necessary to match such advantages. If Erickson and Wollmann have done that homework, they did not make that clear in their performances during last night's job interview. Judging by the information presented, Pedersen and Johannsen are the better candidates.

-------------------------------
Dang, local politics is fun! Stay tuned for my final assessments and endorsements of the local and statewide candidates, plus ballot issues, coming soon!

Madison Chamber Forum: What the Candidates Said

Not a bad crowd, considering there was a ball game on TV.
(And no, Bob was not checking scores on his Blackberry while emcee-ing!)

Hey, late night readers! I just got back from recording tonight's candidates forum, sponsored by the Madison Chamber of Commerce and broadcast live by KJAM. Tonight was the last big public event for all of the local candidates Lake County voters will see on their ballot on Election Day, November 2, just five short days away.

Below are my notes of what the candidates said on the issues. With fifteen candidates for five different offices, there was a lot to take in. Read, digest, and stay tuned for my commentary tomorrow.

The notes are rough paraphrasings [with just a few moments of editorializing in brackets]. Occasionally I'll slip into first person, writing things as the candidates said them. If you want exact wording, see the videos. Yes, there will be video! I got everyone on video this time (including you, Bobbi! :-) ), and I'll be uploading those Chamber Forum videos overnight to the Madville Times channel on YouTube. Enjoy!

* * *

Round 1: Bob Sahr masters the ceremonies, and we start with the District 8 Senate candidates. Pictured above: Sahr at the mic, Senator Olson to his left, then Schmidtke at end of table. Introductions first, then questions.

Senator Russell Olson gets to introduce himself first.

• Lists committees, including Tribal Relations
• Says politics is risk vs reward for candidates; you risk time away from family, hard to travel to Pierre with new baby only 2 months old, missed half of the little one's life during last session
• risk not keeping everyone happy, differing with supporters.
• reward is being able to represent voters and keep promises: I've fulfilled every promise I made as State Senator
• we've balanced the budget without raising taxes or using reserves

Clark Schmidtke introduction:

• Married for 23 years, director of Trent Assisted Living Center, Army vet
• Pierre is broken and needs to be fixed.
  
• I've always been a fighter for what I believe in and will fight for District 8.
  
• We need to cut the budget, and I have specific cuts in mind. I'm against raising taxes but also against cuts in education and Medicaid.
• We are in a recession, but a lot of our problems did not come from the recession.
  

Question #1 (from Chamber Governmental Affairs Committee): South Dakota faces budget shortfall, no stimulus: what do we do?

Schmidtke: First thing is to push for capping spending at 3% or rate of inflation, cut full-time state employees; we had 12,800 pre-Rounds, now 14,500. Consolidate departments, use computers to save staff. Restore competition, eliminate no-bid contracts.

Olson: We also have to keep dangerous people incarcerated; ed, med, and jails leaves only 5% of budget; we could cut everything else and still be $30M in the hole! We made difficult cuts last year, we will continue to find even more efficiencies next session.

Question 2 (Chamber): What would you do to spur economic development in District 8?

Olson: I sit on board of directors of economic development; we are totally reviewing policies to get more capital in hands of small business owners. Just have to get the right funds in the right hands of the right people.

Schmidtke: Try to raise money without raising taxes; focus on low/no-interest loans for businesses we already have in South Dakota instead of wining and dining big biz from elsewhere.

Question 3: (from me!) Farmers have expressed dissatisfaction with the ag productivity tax. Would the candidates support replacing the ag productivity tax with income tax; if not, how do we fix this troublesome tax system?

Schmidtke: Not really up on the property tax situation; I'll look at it, see what the options are. People are telling me they don't like income tax structure, but in time I think we'll need something like that. We need to help the farmers, but I don't know what to do with it right now. I'll listen, study, find out.

Olson: If you want to get rid of me in Pierre, get a majority to do income tax. [Well, now I finally know how to get rid of Russ!] I will never be part of a body that supports income tax. I never supported ag productivity model; I support fair and true market system; we could exclude top third and bottom third of sales, get good value from middle third.

* * *

Round 2: District 8 State House Candidates!

District 8 State House candidates (seated at front, L to R):
Jason Bjorklund, Rep. Gerald Lange, Rep. Mitch Fargen, and Patricia Stricherz.

Patricia Stricherz:

• Says she built Operation Homefront non-profit chapter in South Dakota from scratch, did it while recession hit and national office began focing national organization to cut and merge chapters.
  
• Has fought to keep the program open, even though national office took away her equipment and funding. Stricherz has continued helping families using own resources to convince national office to return support; plans to charter independent chapter next year.
• Folks are worried about keeping jobs, keeping food in table; I've had tough times, can identify with your struggles and concerns. [Appeal to emotion... pretty well-composed.]
  

Rep. Mitch Fargen:

• Chose Education and Commerce committees, important to District 8.
  
• Worked on bills protecting landowner rights on wind easements and promoting blender pumps. [stumbled just a little in this part, had trouble remembering second half: I think Mitch has been having some long days at work and on the campaign trail]
  

Rep. Gerald Lange:

• Again, celebrating democracy! [same theme as in his opening remarks at AAUW forum last week]
  
• Democracy is not easy, but politics, now a nasty word.
• Came to Madison in 1964, saw history major at DSU eliminated by computer revolution.
  
• Won election to Senate in 1990 after two unsuccessful campaigns.
  
• I sought office because "there was a bigger classroom." We need to understand South Dakota has a rotten tax system. [Gerry! You just defined leadership! Leading a the conversation, treating the community as a classroom where we must all help each other learn through conversation! Big hearts on the flow!]
  
• The bishops came to us a few years ago and asked us to get rid of the sales tax on food.
• Losing election in 2006 got my dander up, showed me we still had to make an effort for tax reform.
  
• We have an income tax on banks and insurance companies, why not Wal-Mart? There's the answer to the $100M deficit right there.
  

Jason Bjorklund:

• Born and raised in Madison
• Currently truck driver for MN company [hey, Jason, why haven't they moved here?].
  
• Recession caused by too much "legislation, regulation, and taxation."
• Worked in law enforcement in Air Force, also as sniper-spotter.
  

Question #1 (Chamber): What are your thoughts on education funding?

Fargen: last year, I proposed a 1.2% increase, that got killed last session. We had the money for it, but gave away cash to TransCanada. We only needed $4M for education increase! We could also have put money toward roads and bridges, toward raises for state employees.

Lange: In 1993 or so I introduced a bill to tax the 1099 stocks bonds CDs and other intangibles. Two Republicans (Keith Paisley and Larry Gabriel) had introduced that idea in 1989; state chose video lottery instead. We'd rather get the money from losers than from winners; that's a sad commentary on our ethics.

Bjorklund: We're in a recession, we need to hold the line on education spending. We do not need to spend more on education; look at Washington DC and Detroit with highest spending per student and highest dropout rates and highest failure rates.

Stricherz: I ran in 2008: it's sad that we're still arguing about this issue. Gov. Rounds initiated a pilot laptop program that cost the state $2.9M a year to sustain; we should cut failed programs like that, put it back in general education.

Question 2 (Chamber): Top priorities if elected?

Lange: Get rid of sales tax on food. Then eliminate sales tax on other items. Folks in lower income bracket pay 10% of income in taxes; that's basically an income tax! Those folks would spend that money on other things and stimulate the economy. The folks controlling the state pay about 2% of income in taxes. That's not democracy.

Bjorklund: Defend rights to life, liberty, and property. Second, work on repeal of national health care bill: people should have right to choose own doctors, access best medical care they can afford. Finally: expand gun rights. I want to see us be able to conceal-carry in more states.

Stricherz: Most important: dive into budget, get closer into balancing it. Can't do anything else effectively if we don't do budget right. Then cut excess spending, take care of education, roads, bridges.

Fargen: Balance the budget! We haven't done it seven of last eight years!

Question 3: (No one else in audience raises hand, so I take another swing): Given the state budget crunch, can we save money by consolidating schools? What is the minimum size of school district the state can afford to support?

Bjorklund: I'd like to see all of our schools stay open. Have tax dollars stay with student, let parents decide where kids go to school. Market would make that decision for us. Chester has had good bump just with open enrollment; need to expand choice.

Stricherz: School funding formula is per child, $4654 per child. Funding is there; we need to fund our schools, not worry about size.

Fargen: Should not force any consolidation! I want to get rid of the 100-school minimum. Conde was mostly funding its own school with local money, state still forced schools to close. Closing schools doesn't save state money when state money follows child to next school. Both gub. candidates support getting rid of forced consolidation as well.

Lange: School funding lawsuit challenging state to live up to Constitutional mandate for adequate and equal education to all students. They are 17% of the population but 100% of the future. We must help our kids!

* * *

Round 3: Lake County Auditor!

Shelli Gust:

• Lifelong SD resident, raised just outside Alcester, has lived in Madison last four years.
  
• SDSU grad 2003! [Go Jacks!].
  
• Look to perform duties efficiently and effectively, provide fresh perspective.
  
• I will ensure fiscal responsibility and accountability, openness and accessibility to county records; will post more public records online.
  
• Emphasize "serve" in "public service"

Roberta Janke:

• Lifelong Lake County resident.
  
• Experience and qualifications: 23 years of hands-on work experience in Lake County auditor's office. Hired in 1987 by current auditor Kay Schmidt.
  
• I handle payroll, benefits, deposit reports, voter registration, operation of election scanner, health/vision/life insurance.
  
• Served on recount board in 2008.

Question 1 (Chamber): How do you foster lines of communication with other departments and a smooth working relationship?

Janke: I've been working with these departments for the past 23 years. Register of Deeds, Treasurer, Equalization... every office's business comes through auditor's office.

Gust: Me too! State's Attorney's [where Gust works] office involves similar cooperation. Need to make sure every office knows what's coming down from the commission.

Question 2 (I think this was an audience question): What's the biggest problem you anticipate if elected?

Gust: I wouldn't characterize them as problems, but greatest challenge I see is making more information avaialble to the public. Great open meetings laws took effect July 1; we can work for more transparency, but it will take time to scan documents, make people aware those documents are available.

Janke: Having worked in the auditor's office for 23 years, I say things are working well! Get more information online.

Question 3 (me again): Are electronic voting machines secure, reliable, and feasible for Lake County?

Janke: You need a paper trail on an election. [Really, that's all she said! She pretty clearly does not want electronic voting machines.]

Gust: We work with Sec. State's office. The current automark system has lots of checks, the machines they have now are tested to make sure they are accurate. If we're talking about completely electronic voting, that would take lots of cooperation with Pierre, would require a great deal of testing before implementing at local level.

* * *

Round 4: Lake County Sheriff!

Sheriff Roger Hartman:

• Worked as deputy for 12 years for Sheriff Herb Lurz, sheriff 12 years after that.
  
• Over 1000 hours of in-service training.
  
• I've kept sending down, won over $100K in grants for security equipment.
  
• We've added a fourth deputy to increase patrols.[sounds like Roger was listening last time!]
  

Jason Lurz:

• From Madison, married 16 years [good grief, Jason! you've got a lead on me!], moved back here 2004.
  
• USAF veteran, served in SDHP before Lake County sheriff's office and current Madison city policeman: only candidate with law enforcement experience at city, county, and state level.

Dan Wyatt:

• Served in USAF, worked drug patrols in Panama for Army;
  
• worked for Lake and Moody County drug task force (thanks to federal money), then went to Madison Police Department.
  
• I can be a leader thanks to military and local leadership classes; 1000 hours of civilian training, 2000 horus of military training.
  
• Primary goal: keep us all safe. This is my home, I worry about what's going on here.

Question 1 (Chamber): How will you react in a crisis?

Lurz: We respond to a variety of situations. City police respond to medical calls on regular basis, very hard when there are family members present. I've been recognized by Red Cross with a life-saving award. First priority must be to take care of the patient; sometimes when you're the only person there, you have to find things the family members can do to help, keep busy.

Wyatt: Few years back, we had an individual in Wentworth douse himself and yard and house wall with gasoline; he held a lighter, threatened to light up; I had to talk this guy down. I'm also able to talk people down in domestic dispute situations. We've all three notified loved ones of deaths.

Hartman: You see many things in law enforcement. One vehicle accident, 15 or so years ago south of town, Sunday morning, family coming back from church, three kids in car dead, parent strapped in car still alive. You do what you have to do, go home, give your kids a hug, then go shed some tears in private [dang: that's a pretty sensitive and compelling narrative, the best-told story of the three].

Question 2 (audience, I think): need for changes at sheriff's office?

Wyatt: First changes behind the doors. First contact other counties, see if we can arrange to hold their prisoners, make some money to make improvements. We'll go slow and easy, make sure things get done in orderly fashion. Second, I will be a working sheriff out in the community. I'll be out and about, asking for your input.

Hartman: Lots of changes in last 12 years; I want to continue this work. 12 years ago there was only one computer in the whole office, on secretary's desk; now every staffer has one, plus computers in cars. DNA testing is a new development. You do have to keep room in jail for our local inmates.

Lurz: In my study of the budget, I see a lot of ways to save money. First priority should be to save, not spend. Over $500K for sheriff and jail now. We have lots of overtime, some reimbursed by federal government, need to reduce! We can hire part-timers to alleviate that problem. We also need service from sheriff, must be involved with community.

Question 3 (from Neal McIntyre): better response to remote areas of county? Maybe cooperate with other counties? [remember, Neal lives closer to Salem than Madison]

Hartman: We're in the middle of the county, and we do the best we can. There's a deputy out every night, sometimes two. Other counties: we have an unwritten agreement to provide mutual assistance. 20 years ago we were all dispatched to help with the Hobo Day riot.

Lurz: Be a leader, schedule appropriately. Some nights those deputies go home by 9 p.m. Some days we have two deputies working a day shift; no need for that when we have a sheriff who can do more during the day. Cross-deputization is overdue: we should extend liability coverage and allow city police to respond in country. Part-timers can also fill some gaps. Wait for response should be no more than drive time.

Wyatt: Where Neal lives is a problem way out on edge of county. We take care of business in our own counties, but we help each other when necessary. More deputies? We can hire part-timers and cross-deputize. Also, call the sheriff; the sheriff should respond.

* * *

Fifth and Final Round: Lake County Commission!

The Lake County Commission candidates (seated at front, L to R):
Craig Johannsen, Doug Erickson, Kelli Wollmann, and Commissioner Scott Pedersen

Kelli Wollmann:

• Lifetime resident of county, husband Darwin with Madison Police Department for last 23 years.
  
• Mostly stay-at-home mom, but worked in management
• active in providing music at various events and fundraisers
• involved in Lake County Historical Society and Prairie Village boards.

Commissioner Scott Pedersen:

• End of this year makes 16 years of public service [career politician? any Tea Party protests? ;-) ].
  
• Unlike the state legislators, we've balanced our budget every year.
  
• We have wheel tax (all spent on 220 miles of banked highway, 74 miles of gravel roads) and property tax (about 23 cents of every dollar stays here); we must continue to work hard to grow the county and the taxbase.
  
• Two big projects; public access area at Lake Madison (working out well, willing to expand) and Water Quality Committee (wonderful thing, in infancy, has lots of potential).
• Do me a favor: when you're in the courthouse, thank Kay Schmidt for many years of good service [amazingly, the audience does not burst into spontaneous applause... but hey, we're Lutherans. ;-) ]
  

Craig Johannsen:

• Commissioner for 10 years until 2008: worked on drainage ordinances, laid groundwork for public access on Lake Madison.
  
• Serve on all sorts of area governing boards.
  
• I pledge to be accessible to anyone who has concerns or problems.
  
• I have the "time, experience, and commitment" to be a good commissioner.

Doug Erickson:

• Born and raised around Junius, farmed until 1993.
  
• Lifelong resident.
  
• [pause...] "As you can tell, I'm a little bit nervous."
  
• Currently have a small construction business, work all around the county, well aware of many of the problems here.
• Willing to work with everybody to solve problems.

Question #1 (Chamber): Renovations to courthouse, infrastructure needs, new employee: how do we meet those new budget demands?

Pedersen: Renovation: we're in process of working with Sioux Falls firm and Pierre bonding company: we'd issue 17-year bond with about 1.5-2% interest rate, but different from traditional loan; we'd put principal payment in separate account, could pay off in 13-14 years. New employee: Lake Madison Assoc. and East Dakota Water District kicking in to help.

Johannsen: Bonding better way to go with renovation; there are reserves, but we don't want to take them too low. New employee: grant money from EDWDD and Lake Madison for new employee.

Erickson: At peril of repeating those fellas... there are some avenues where we can save money. I'm not for any more taxes; as a small businessperson, I'm taxed out!

Wollmann: With Internet, it's very important to work together with other counties and agencies to come up with solutions. We can't be the only ones with new building needs; there are many grants available that, working with other communities, we may be able to get a lot done for less burden on the taxpayers.

Question 2: Charlie Scholl takes aim at Commissioner Pedersen: Pedersen has pushed for new zoning rules including unelected, unqualified folks to sit in at meetings and vote [what? really?] Why?

Johannsen: What exact position are you asking about? If you mean chairman of the zoning board, that person is as informed as any commissioner, if they vote, they are expressing their sense of feelings from the board. Scholl says appeal of planning board is to commission; how can we appeal if the same board official is hearing the appeal? Johannsen is unsure.

Erickson: That 150-page ordinance is a pretty big deal to be laying on the county right now. There's a lot of things that most taxpayers don't even know about in that new ordinance. having someone fill in for you voting, I'm not for that. I would strongly suggest being at the Nov. 9 commission meeting to get a better understanding of the whole zoning revision.

Wollmann: I'm not all that familiar with the problem, but it doesn't sound right. If you're elected by the people, you work for the people.

Pedersen: I'm the liaison between the commission and the zoning committee. We talked about the need for the zoning board president or vice-president to come to a commission meeting and present board's view if I'm not available, but we did not talk about letting that person vote. Come to Nov. 9 meeting, find out about it.

Question 3 [See second half of video] (Audience is fired up on county commission issues!): Wheel tax: first presented as temporary: started at $2 a tire, now $4 a tire; how much longer will that tax go? Some counties have gotten rid of it.

Erickson: The wheel tax has been on for as long as I remember. I don't like it, but we've got to get the money somewhere. I'm willing to work to find a solution. We're already taxed to death; small business guy can't go much more. I welcome taxpayers' input on finding solution.

Wollmann: Commissioners can't please everyone. There are reasons we have taxes to benefit the county. Get involved with your community, voice your opinion to get things changed.

Pedersen: Probably started in early 1990s, originally $2 a wheel, went to $4 a wheel around 1996 or 1997, stayed that level since. In 2009 we took in $268K. Max we can charge per vehicle is for four wheels, $16 per vehicle. Last year we had bids to overlay highway at $100K a mile. Forgive the wheel tax, and we can all drive on gravel. I don't want more taxes, but we have to pay for what we want somehow.

Johannsen: Wheel tax in place before I was on commission; we did increase it to tax four wheels. I have to agree with Scott: we have two sources of income, and that's it. Not my favorite thing, but we have to keep the roads up.

Question 4: (Neal McIntyre) Opportunity for public to vote on new zoning ordinance? Impact on average citizen?

Wollmann: Public vote would be good on this. Sometimes over-regulation is not always good, makes it more difficult for everybody.

Pedersen: No public vote opportunity on schedule. There is an opportunity for public input on November 9. Water Quality Committee has been reviewing this ordinance line by line [yup; I've been at those meetings!]. It is a big ordinance; putting 150 pages in front of public for vote would be confusing, but certainly we are open to changing things to make it work.

Johannsen: We work with First District Todd Kays; basically the changes coming are mostly updates for legal matters. A lot of it is just bookkeeping and updating so lawyers can't pick it apart as easily. Everyone is welcome to review it.

Erickson: I'm not for sure it's just an update. If it's going to affect everyone in the county, if it affects livestock, having old cars, etc. then it should be brought to vote of the people. If it's just a rewording, then I'm for it. It should not be just in five people's hands to decide.

Question 5: (Paul Nordaune) What was spent on the foolishness in Winfred cleaning up the Evans and J&J Farms? $40-45K or $100K? Why all the unnecessary cleanup, and why the sale of the land for just $2500?

Pedersen: I wasn't on the commission when the money was spent for the cleanup. We sold the property according to legal process. We advertised, put it up for sale. I think we spent $75K-80K, but I didn't authorize that expenditure. [Note: Charlie Scholl afterward questioned the timeframe, said Commissioner Pedersen was more involved in this process.]

Johannsen: I don't know how much was spent. We can dig and find the number. We sell the proerty for whatever we can get to get it back on the tax rolls.

Erickson: I don't know what was spent to clean it up, but if a person is running a business and following the rules on pollution and nuisances, I don't see why we had to spend tax dollars to clean up somebody else's land.

Wollmann: I also don't know expense. Quality of life to one person might be different for next person. Laws and ordinances are put in place to prevent nuisance problems within a community. We're all in it together, that's just the way it is.

Grading the District 8 House Candidates: Patricia Stricherz

If Vegas took bets on the District 8 South Dakota State House race, they'd offer these odds:

• Mitch Fargen: 2 to 1.
• Jerry Johnson and Gerry Lange: 2.5 to 1
• Patricia Stricherz: 10 to 1.
  

I don't lay these odds lightly, especially the last figure. Believe it or not, this liberal Democrat blogger has had a number of interesting, engaging conversations with Republican newcomer Patricia Stricherz. I'm convinced she has a good heart and a genuine desire and ability to serve the public. I'm also convinced she's going to come in last in this election. She has the least visibility in terms of name recognition, advertising, door-knocking, and even online presence. At the two public forums I've attended where she has taken the stage with her fellow candidates, Stricherz has shown the least grasp of the various issues raised. That's not to say Stricherz doesn't have strong opinions, policy positions, and life experiences worth listening to; she simply doesn't have the same political sense her opponents do of which points to focus on or how to "sell herself" to the voters.

Consider Stricherz's response last Tuesday night at the Madison Chamber forum to the opening question, "What do you hope to accomplish during your first term?" This one's a freebie: tee up your favorite talking points, your big vision, and swing for the back 40. Fargen talks ethanol and education. Lange talks tax reform and education. Johnson talks funding and accountability in education. Stricherz talks about not making guys register as sex offenders for having sexual contact with young girls in their peer group.

Now Stricherz was trying to make a point (one worth discussing) about the need for the law to distinguish between real offenders and teenagers who aren't dangerous criminals. She likely knows some young people who've been hit hard by the law for doing something that maybe all parties involved feel didn't do any harm. I hesitate to even write that last sentence, for fear readers may get the wrong impression from what I'm saying unless I write a lengthy explanation. I don't want to write that lengthy explanation, because, honestly, there are bigger legislative fish to fry.

Stricherz acknowledged those bigger fish—energy, education, the economy—but insisted that leniency for young sex "offenders" is the "one issue" that "keeps coming up."

Um, I've done some door-to-door this year. No one has brought this issue up. I haven't seen press on it. I haven't seen blog posts on it. Stricherz is the only person I've heard mention it.

On the one hand, I admire Stricherz for using the public forum to bring up an issue that maybe isn't on everyone's radar and perhaps should be. But politically, it was a mistake. She takes an easy question, brings up a sensitive issue that needs more explaining than time allows, gives opponents an easy line to twist, and makes an implausible claim to boot.

Stricherz also got hung up on solar energy. An audience member brought the issue up at the AAUW forum a couple weeks ago. Interesting, but not a front-burner issue for most voters. Yet Stricherz made it a centerpiece of her response on economic development Tuesday evening. Again, maybe there's a plan brewing here, something that takes longer to explain than a two-minute response, but Stricherz came off sounding like one of my young debaters who gets caught off guard by a tricky argument and then devotes herself to briefing out that one argument, even though in the grand scheme of things, it's not a big voting issue.

Understand, I don't say these things about Stricherz out of any personal or partisan animus. As I said, I've had enjoyable and extended conversations with her. I think she would be a good legislator, maybe even my favorite kind of legislator, a maverick who won't let anyone boss her around and will truly stand up for the little guy. Unfortunately, the Madison Chamber of Commerce—oops, I mean, the Republican Party—doesn't like that kind of maverick. And even if they did, Stricherz hasn't figured out how to project that spirit, that passion for service, into the public persona of an effective politician.

Stricherz has some great ideas that need to be heard. Unfortunately, we aren't hearing them on the campaign trail, and Stricherz won't get to make those ideas heard in Pierre... at least not this time around.

Stay tuned: more to come on Fargen, Lange, and Johnson!

Bohl and Giles Stand out in County Commission Candidates Forum

After Tuesday night's Chamber forum, one of the Lake County commission candidates said to me, "I hate this s---. I just want to do the job."

Note to all commissioners: this "stuff"—public forums, answering questions, taking the stage and laying out your ideas for the county—is a central part of doing the job. Tuesday night, Chris Giles and Dan Bohl showed they are the best at that part of the job. Of the five candidates, Giles and Bohl were clearly the most at ease at the podium. They offered the most thorough and most direct answers. Giles demonstrates solid confidence in the public spotlight. Bohl can be a bit of a screwball, cracking jokes regularly, but his humor shows he truly enjoys the business of campaigning and governing. And if I'm conducting interviews for a job (and that's what we're doing here), I'd like the interviewees to demonstrate confidence and a love of the job.

You can compare the candidates yourself by checking out the video of their opening and closing statements. In the Q&A, I found it telling that Hageman found a way in three of the four questions to say, one way or another, that he wasn't sure or didn't know or didn't have any thoughts on a given topic. Such Socratic wisdom isn't a great selling point for a candidate; voters generally prefer candidates to have at least some answers figured out before we vote for them.

On specifics, I do have to ding Bohl on his response to the question on health insurance for commissioners. He did answer directly—"No. For commissioners, no way." He said he would take the $3,600 the county gives commissioners who opt out of health coverage (good) and donate that money to the Madison Public Library (great!) and the Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber of Commerce?! Dan, Dan, Dan—you have money to give, money you can help people in need with, and you give it to an organization consisting of the wealthiest individuals in town? Let's talk about some alternatives....

I was surprised to hear unanimous support for creating a county building inspector. Anderson and Hageman tried really hard to throw a lifeline to country folks who might not want bureaucrats to come snooping around their property or tell them how to build a shed. Anderson said creating the new position might not be feasible within our budget, and Hageman agreed with him that maybe we should just have a part-time inspector (Hageman's favorite words seem to be maybe and could be). But Johannsen and Giles talked about specific ways to make the position happen (increasing fees, partnering with the city, combining the position with other duties), and Bohl said the position would pay for itself in the long-run. So get ready for one more government official to get involved with your building projects.

On government openness, I was pleased to hear Bohl say we should move meetings to the evening, as the city does to make it possible for more working folks to attend. Hageman fretted that we might not be able to cover everything in the evening, but I notice the city and the school board manage to cover their agendae just fine in the evening.

I was also very pleased to hear Giles say that we need to "reduce and minimize" the commission's use of executive session. Hear hear!

Bohl and Giles gave the best answers at the forum. Johannsen's commission experience helped him keep up, although I was disappointed to hear him say on the health insurance question that he would "go along with whatever the rest of the board wants to do" (folks who go along with the crowd don't generally make the top of my voting list). Neither Anderson and Hageman sounded like they were terribly excited to be interviewing for the job.

I know some of you are thinking, "Oh, but that Cory, he just like big talkers. After all, he is voting for Obama." Quite right: I like a good speech. But speaking well in public isn't just "stuff" to be gotten done with; it's a key part of the job. It's how a politician demonstrates the skills, ideas, and values he or she will bring to the job. And Tuesday night, Chris Giles and Dan Bohl showed their skills, ideas, and values the best.

Olson Goes Negative, Calls Parsley (Gasp!) a Lobbyist

Republican candidate for District 8 State Senate Russell Olson must be feeling the heat. At last night's candidates forum in Madison, Olson and his opponent, Democrat Scott Parsley, were asked "What differentiates you from your opponent?" Parsley addressed two policy issues, saying he will support more funding than Olson has for education and renewable energy incentives. Olson chose the personal over policy, touting his two years of experience as a legislator. He then characterized Parsley's experience in Pierre and in Washington "as a lobbyist and special interest." Olson said that lobbyists tell people how to vote while legislators listen and serve.

Now I feel a little silly calling that charge political hardball, but in the relatively gentle world of District 8 politics, that's about as close to throwing a punch as we get.

I don't mind hardball—that's politics. That's how the game is played, especially if you think you're behind. It's just too bad that Olson plays it so poorly. All too often, Olson uses keywords and catchphrases in limp attempts to appeal to casual listeners without apparently thinking about what he's actually saying.

Sure, Scott Parsley is a registered lobbyist in Pierre. He goes to Pierre to represent East River Electric... which means if you get electricity from East River, he's representing your interests. He does the same thing for East River and its customers that Russell Olson's employer, Heartland Consumer Power District, hires Dennis and Drew Duncan* to do. Heartland's March 2005 newsletter (PDF!) proudly touts its lobbying efforts "to promote and protect the interests of our Customers" (wow, you even get a capital C). That newsletter directs folks to contact Tim Muellenberg and Russell Olson himself with any questions about specific legislation Heartland may be lobbying for or against.

Olson's previous employer, the Lake Area Improvement Corporation, also had a lobbyist in Pierre, representing, I'm sure, the interests of anyone who supports economic development in Lake County.

Given Olson's comment last night, I guess we should be shocked—shocked!—that he would even associate with such organizations.

Olson's jab evidently means we shouldn't vote for his fellow Republican Jerry Johnson: he's a registered lobbyist for the City of Madison. Other nefarious lobbyist types in our midst:

• Kristofer Beck (Student Federation)
• Bryan Crocker (Prostrollo Auto Mall)
• Charlie Johnson (Dakota Rural Action)
• Jerome Lammers (Pork Producers Council, 1998)
• Don Marker (Sioux Valley Energy)
• Dr. David Rossing (State Medical Association)
• Bob Sahr (East River)
  
• Pete Stemper (Prostrollo Auto Mall)

Well, I guess we have it straight from Russ: Prostrollo Auto Mall "tells people how to vote." I knew it!

Olson's lobbying jab against Parsley is just silly. It's another example of the Olson campaign acting like some other Republicans we know: just saying stuff, avoiding policy, campaigning by connotation, and in the end, dragging itself and its fellow Republicans down.

But don't worry: if Olson loses on November 4, he'll probably still get to go to Pierre. Heartland will send him out to lobby—I mean, "promote and protect the interests of our Customers."

*Russ's boss, Heartland GM Mike McDowell, further touts Denny Duncan's paid lobbying in Heartland's March 2006 newsletter: "His work for Heartland has been outstanding. The protection and advancement of our Customer's [sic] public power system requires constant attention and Denny Duncan provides that service at the highest level." Coincidence! Dennis Duncan's law firm had somebody had someone giving the Madville Times constant attention last spring as they trolled my blog to lobby for TransCanada.

Update 2008.10.24: Dennis and Drew Duncan have also each donated $250 to Olson's Senate campaign. (Marie Duncan, who shares Dennis'S P.O. box, also chipped in $200). Olson takes money from lobbyists? Again, gasp! I wonder who's telling whom how to vote now.

Madison Chamber Forum: Video!

Here's video from last night's candidates forum in Madison! The following list gives links to the opening and closing statements from each candidate in the order they were presented at the forum. (Sorry—really gotta crank the volume!) You can also read my summaries of the Senate, House, and Commission candidates' responses to questions at the forum.

District 8 State Senate:

• Scott Parsley—opening
• Russell Olson—opening
• Russell Olson—closing
• Scott Parsley—closing

District 8 State House:

• Gerry Lange—opening
• Mitch Fargen—opening
• Patricia Stricherz—opening
• Jerry Johnson—opening
• Jerry Johnson—closing
• Gerry Lange—closing
• Mitch Fargen—closing
• Patricia Stricherz—closing

Lake County Commission:

• Gene Anderson—opening
• Craig Johannsen—opening
• Chris Giles—opening
• Roger Hageman—opening
• Dan Bohl—opening
• Roger Hageman—closing
• Dan Bohl—closing
• Gene Anderson—closing
• Craig Johannsen—closing
• Chris Giles—closing

Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: County Commission!

Round III of tonight's Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: our Lake County Commission candidates! Here's a rough approximation of what Republicans Chris Giles, Roger Hageman, and Dan Bohl and Democrats Craig Johannsen and Gene Anderson had to say in the Q&A:

Question 1: What past experiences make you the best candidate for the Lake County Commission?

• Johannsen: Serving 10 years as commission gives me good perspective.
• Giles: In my past experience as Lake County States Attorney, I worked with different departments to help solve their problems, advised and observed the commission. Many people don't realize how complex county government can be, since they don't come into contact with all the parts.
• Hageman: I have lots of experiences, but “I'm not sure any qualify me for the job" [kidding!] In farming, I know what it's like to have floor pulled from under you and have to pull things together to make things work. I'm on church boards, corn producers, soybean producers, other ag associations in county.
• Bohl: If there's a problem I will talk it to death. [joke!] I can communicate with almost anybody. Last year I subbed for elementary P.E.: having lived through that day, I believe I can be a county commissioner (or run an insane asylum or be president: anything is possible!). I have experience as city commissioner, plus 33 years as coach and teacher. Most importantly, I love people, love helping people. You know that I listen, I respond. “If you can put up with my gab, I will help.”
• Anderson: Last two years on Lake County Zoning board has been great experience. I know what commissioners deal with. I'm on church boards, cooperative boards. There are things we can work together on.

Question 2: Given county budget restraints, how feel about offering health insurance to elected county officials?

• Giles: Lake County was one of first to offer this coverage. Many more counties offer it now. It's nice to make it available if officials want to be part; I don't think we should allow candidates to opt out and take the cash. That wasn't an option when I was states attorney; very few counties offer that option. It's not illegal or improper, but commissioners shouldn't get that option as part-time employees.
• Hageman: “I don't know if I'm for or against it.” Having a larger group is good for premiums. If funds are available, I'd agree with going along with it.
• Bohl: No. For commissioners, no way. I pay for my own insurance, I can handle it. I've said previously that if the policy continues, I will donate my $3600 opt-out money to the Madison Public Library and the Chamber of Commerce.
• Anderson: Health is a big budget item. I'd have to say no, given the way the economy is. There are better ways to use our tax dollars. Commissioners can handle their own health insurance.
• Johannsen: I was paying for my own insurance before I got the job. It does cost. I'll go along with whatever the rest of the board wants to do.

Question 3: Would each of you support a county inspector to insure county guidelines and ordinances are enforced?

• Anderson: I have no problem having a county inspector. But is it feasible within our budget? How important is it? Maybe we should have a part-time inspector. I'm not sure we can afford full-time.
• Johannsen: Yes, it is a needed position. Maybe it's a good problem: growth means more building, means we need an inspector. We can't have buildings too close to right of way and such; better to catch problems right away rather than have to move a building. Funding: maybe create zoning/drainage/weed inspector, increase fees to pay.
• Giles: A building inspector is needed, especially for new construction and to look for existing violations. No one does that now; it's handled just on a complaint basis. We could make a combined position for building and zoning, maybe even do something in conjunction with the city. Partnering with the city could make a full-time position that can meet the needs of both entities. Funding is an issue; maybe we need to look at building permit fees.
• Hageman: I agree an inspector could be beneficial. Not everybody is aware of all the codes. Folks doing their own building can be problem. Maybe we should just have it be a part-time position.
• Bohl: Creating a buildig inspector position is like geothermal heating: very expensive at first, but it pays for itself after so many years. Sure, it'll be tough to pay for the position, but in a few years, an inspector would pay off by eliminating problems. Madison's experience shows it works and is very useful for city gov't. It would help the county, too.

Question 4: What do to make county government more open to county residents?

• Bohl: “I like this one.” Not a bad idea to change meeting time: people can't come to nine o'clock meetings. What's wrong with going to 5 or 5:30? Doing a cable broadcast costs, but lots of people watch the city commission broadcasts; might be an option for the county. We must always be aware of open meeting laws, people's right to hear and know, right to attend and to respond, to have open communication. We don't have all of the avenues open now.
• Hageman: [To Mayor Hexom's rephrasing of the question and asking if he has any thoughts on the issue]: “No I don't.” Meeting times: reading the minutes shows that meetings can go long. Unless we're going to hold extra meetings to make sure we cover the agenda, moving to the evenings is going to be difficult. Maybe it's o.k. to do special evening meetings. We could also maybe move meetings to different towns if town-specific items are on the agenda.
• Giles: Some flexibility in meeting time should be looked at. Maybe we don't need to move every meeting to evening. In the past, meetings have been set in evening when we anticipate lots of public input. Maybe do it once a month. It's important to make meetings open to media through radio or cable TV. Another issue: certain times and places require executive sessions, but we need to reduce and minimize them. People are more confident in open government.
• Johannsen: We definitely have to follow open meeting rules more stringently. Meeting times: we have done special meetings, and I have no problem with moving meetings to other towns. Radio curently gives good coverage.
  
• Anderson: The radio and paper cover it. Maybe the board needs to be more open to the public, maybe use less executive session.

Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: Lange, Fargen, Stricherz, and Johnson

Round II of tonight's Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: our District 8 State House candidates! Here's my best summary (not a verbatim transcript, mind you) of what Democrats Gerry Lange and Mitch Fargen and Republicans Patricia Stricherz and Jerry Johnson had to say during the Q&A.

Question 1: What do you hope to accomplish during your first term?

• Fargen: Two things I really want to push for: last year, Rounds imposed a tax increase on ethanol blender pumps. That tax increase was unconstitutional since it didn't have 2/3 of legislature backing it. It was also completely against the effort to develop home-grown resources. I want to repeal that blender pump tax increase. We also need to find resources to pay for education, raise teacher salaries, and do it with a long-term solution, not a short-term fix like the Governor and Legislature have done the last few years.
• Stricherz: Energy, education, and the economy are big issues, but as I talk to voters, one issue keeps coming up: they're worried about young people having to register as sex offenders for having contact with young girls in their peer group. We need to discern between real offenders and children who aren't dangerous criminals.
• Johnson: On education, I differ with other members of my party. As a Madison city commissioner, I often questioned why the city had reserve accounts if it had no plan to use them? We need to look for ways to further the community. We should look at funding education with the reserves. We also need more accountability at state and local levels to use every penny in education wisely.
• Lange: It's difficult to win in a Democrat minority without reaching across the aisle. We must convince them our ideas are good. I've urged another tax system. North Dakota is far ahead of us, so are all other surrounding states. We need to focus on three things: education, education, education. The Finns saw education investment lift them from the bottom to the top of European economic development.

Question 2: With the threat of a slowing economy, how will you promote economic development in District 8?

• Stricherz: District 8 is a great district to live in right now. We have lots of opportunities right now. Let's promote continued agricultural development, energy development, other energy sources like solar.
• Johnson: We must look to regional resources like what's going on in Howard. I toured Howard several weeks ago; what's good for Howard is good for Madison, Woonsocket, etc. We should facilitate regional economic development, help all communities work together.
• Lange: After the election, we'll see change throughout the nation: expect New Deal type projects to make work on public infrastructure, funded through bonding or taxation to employ people in a grassroots effort to stimulate economy instead of trickle-down economics. We need lots of wind development; put turbines on school and public lands to help school funding.
• Fargen: We should be able to get a “Highway 34 Corridor” together to work together, encourage other businesses to come in and use the district's resources. Let's bring businesses, bring tech school programs here.

Question 3: South Dakota has a teacher shortage in secondary education. One solution: differentiated pay (more pay for secondary teachers than for elementary teachers). Your thoughts?

• Johnson: Last year the state legislature approved a package to increase teacher salaries. I don't necessarily agree with differentiated pay. Local districts have the opportunity to evaluate all teachers and decide what teachers should be paid. State Legislature and Department of Education should not decide. In the business world, better performance and more experience mean you get paid more. That's how local districts should be able to do it.
• Stricherz: I agree with Jerry. We all have to earn our pay. We may also need to consider whether diminishing enrollment means we need to combine three school districts into one. Do elementary in one town, middle school in second, high school in third. That would save money that could be applied toward higher teacher pay.
• Fargen: I'm against differentiated pay. School districts set salaries. We always want local control. The state legislature can set what we want the salaries to be, but local control is better. Let schools decide on experience.
• Lange: It's hard to work differentiated pay out with teacher's union. I've heard elementary teachers are more important in formative years; maybe we need best at lower levels. The teacher shortage is a problem because of lack of funds. I'd rather expand the opportunities for raising salaries the way other states have with a reasonable tax system that puts education first rather than skimping on it as we've done.

Question 4: Do you support a smoking ban in bars and restaurants?

• Lange: In theory it's good, but it's not viable in South Dakota with our attitudes toward individual freedoms and local control. A smoking ban would not be a wise decision.
• Fargen: I completely support that! Families need protection. Why infringe on families' right to be in that public area? We need to look at whether such a ban would apply on tribal areas, but I do support a smoking ban.
• Stricherz: I strongly oppose that idea. Business owners should be able to decide for themselves on how they treat their customers. It's not feasible for the state to dictate. Most restaurants and bars do good job of separating smokers and non-smokers; it should stay that way.
• Johnson: It should be up to city commission to decide [a joke! Jerry cracks a funny for emcee Mayor Hexom!]. Actually, I would oppose such a ban. Business owners should have the right to decide how they attract business (or don't).

Madison Chamber Candidates Forum: Parsley vs. Olson

Whoo-hoo! I'm back from the candidates' forum sponsored by the Madison Chamber of Commerce. Sorry I couldn't live blog—no public signal available at the Madison High School auditorium (boy, I pay thousands of tax dollars, and all I get is this free public education).

But here are my notes on the candidates' responses. I'll hold back from commentary tonight (although it's really, really hard!) and just give you the straight answers, as best as I was able to transcribe them. I'll post commentary tomorrow, along with videos of the candidates' opening and closing statements tomorrow. Enjoy!

First up: Q&A with District 8 State Senate candidates Republican Russell Olson and Democrat Scott Parsley.

Question 1: State revenues may be affected greatly with the current economic conditions. What state programs could afford to get less money if we have to tighten belts?

• Olson: It's important to look for efficiencies. Last year I introduced HB 1240 to make DMV self-sufficient for first time since inception. We don't always have to cut funding.
• Parsley: First, we need to not panic: we can't be sure where things are going. Governor Rounds has come out to say we may need cuts, but the state investment manager says don't panic. One area to cut: state government has grown at rate of 5-5.5% over past few years, faster than other areas of gov't in SD. Let's tighten belts there! We can also help agencies become more self-sufficient without raising fees on users.

Question 2: What differentiates you from your opponent?

• Parsley: Olson talks about education. He says he voted for a $21 million dollar budget increase for education that his fellow District 8 legislators Gassman and Sutton voted against. Thing is, they voted against it because it offered a 2.5% increase, and that's not enough. I agree: that's not enough! We also differ on action on renewable energy and developing incentives. I've worked with the governor and drafted legislation that has actually passed and is helping.
• Olson: The main thing is experience. I've actually served for two years in the Legislature, responded to e-mails, attended cracker barrels, taken calls from constituents on nights and weekends. Parsley's experience in Pierre and Washington is as a lobbyist and special interest. Lobbyists tell people how to vote; legislators listen and serve.

Question 3: Everyone running says they want to increase funding for education. How would you do it?

• Olson: That's the “million-dollar question”; in tight economic times, we have to find ways to do more with what we have. I'll introduce an energy bill to allow schools to use capital outlay to pay energy bills (fuel, electricity). For example, in Chester that would free up $67K in general fund that could be used to raise teacher pay.
• Parsley: I disagree with Russ: it's a “billion-dollar question.” Using reserve funds to pay for fuel? Those are local tax dollars, not state dollars. That approach doesn't do anything to increase the state's share of education. The state has trust funds set up to fund education. We currently pull 4% from the education enhancement fund. It has an extra $100M. There are other trust funds we could use for education. Maybe it's time to reprioritize. State Treasurer Vern Larson just reported the state has lots of funds available.

Question 4: Economy down, poverty up: what measures do you support to help people in need?

• Parsley: We have more two-income families, more uninsured children than any other state in country. We need to look at how we're spending money now, reprioritize to provide (for instance) good nutrition and health care for kids so they can do better in school.
• Olson: We have to educate citizenry on prioritizing their spending. We truly have a group of people who are uninsured and can't afford health insurance and good food, but there is a group in our state who don't give nutrition and health insurance priority above plasma TV, cell phones, cable. Take care of family first, luxuries second.