A new work week. A whole new set of problems on the horizon. It should be easy enough to come up with a piece this morning, but it just isn't happening.
By the end of the day the decision in the election lawsuit is due. Will there be a new election? How will it take place? Who will be able to run?
Not sure I can grasp the concept that is being argued by some that the violations of protocol and procedure is so great as to require a new B of H election, but leave everything else standing. I just don't seem how one can assume the problems only influenced one race.
Assuming the Judge's decision on the contested ballots, there is no doubt there should be a new B of H election based on the race ending in a tie.
I know, you are as sick of reading about this as I am about writing about it. Still an extremely significant event that is not over yet.
I threw my crystal ball out the window this morning. Appears to be too many wrinkles in the fabric of time, with too many possible folds. Trying to look into the future is like opening up a box containing five jigsaw puzzles, each consisting of a thousand pieces, each with identical borders, but each forming entirely different centers.
I don't know what the final pictures are going to look like anymore, and don't even want to hazard a guess. Too many people seem steadfast in their determination to make pieces fit no matter what has to be done.
That's all I can muster this morning. Be Safe.
With all that's happened today, I'm surprised that nobody has replied. I may be more surprised that John has not updated the blog, given these events.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone have any copies of the ruling of the BOH election OR the letter that the BOH sent?
All I have heard was from WBSM or the S-T. I'm not so sure I want to rely on their quotes or interpretations to formulate an opinion. I think these these events are worth a lot of discussion.
I actually applaud the BOH to push for a more comprehensive sound study. That could have been brilliant move, if done initially. It's still a very smart move now no doubt.
The cost of such a study should have been always been borne by the developer. In my personal opinion, the average (state) taxpayer should not have to pay for a study that industry should be EXPECTED to do.
As a Town, we've essentially commissioned the State to perform an intensive study. We should have engaged a contractor/consultant to collect data in the same parameters as prescribed by regulation and policy. I think a private consultant could have devoted more resources to sampling, data collection, etc., and within a more expedient time frame. Local and State governments should then use that data to compare to regulation and policy.